TranslationinDiaspora:
SephardicSpanish-Hebrewtranslationsinthesixteenthcentury
DavidWacks
Introduction
In1492,whentheCatholicmonarchsFerdinandandIsabellagavetheirJewishsubjectsthe
choicebetweenconversiontoCatholicismorexpulsion,manySephardicJewsoptedto
leavetheirhomeland,relocatingtoNorthAfrica,theOttomanEmpire,orWesternEurope.
WiththeExpulsion,theSepharadim,1whohadalwaysidentifiedasapeoplelivingin
diasporafromtheirBiblicalhomeland,nowfoundthemselvesinaseconddiasporafrom
theirnativelandwheretheirancestorshadlivedsincebeforeRomantimes.Spanish,their
nativelanguagetheyoncesharedwiththeChristianmajority,becameadiasporicJewish
languagespokenalongsideTurkishorArabicorDutch.AselsewhereinEurope,Africa,and
Asia,JewsinSpainconsideredthemselvestobelivinginDiaspora,descendantsofthose
IsraeliteswhowereexiledfromJudeafirstbytheBabyloniansandsubsequentlybythe
Romans.Theirreligiousandliterarycultureexpressedadiasporicconsciousness.As
SpaniardsorIberianstheysharedmanyoftheaestheticandculturalvaluesoftheir
Christianneighbors;asmedievalJewstheyunderstoodtheirownhistoryalongprophetic
lines:theywerechosentosufferthepainofexile,tokeepGod’slawuntilthearrivalofthe
Messiah.SephardicpoetssuchasJudahHaleviwrotepassionatelyofreturningtoZion
(Scheindlin2008),butatthesametimethesepoetswerealsonativesoftheIberian
Peninsula,speakersofSpanishandotherRomancedialects,andaficionadosoflocal
troubadourpoetry,knightlyRomances,folktalesandballads.
Thesetwodiasporas,fromtheHolyLandandfromSpainwould“echobackand
forth”intheSephardicimagination(Boyarin;Clifford1994,305).Thisdoublediaspora
gaverisetoanewhistoricalconsciousnessformedinthecrucibleofSpain’simperial
expansionandtingedwithanewmessianicurgencybroughtonbythemassivechanges
afootintheEarlyModernMediterranean:Protestantism,printculture,increasingly
sophisticatedtradenetworks,andtheexpansionofSpain’sempireintoWesternEurope,
NorthAfrica,andbeyond.
ForcenturiesbeforetheirexpulsionfromSpain(1492)andPortugal(1497),the
Sepharadim,orJewsoftheIberianPeninsula,hadlongusedliterarytranslationand
adaptationasawayofmediatingbetweenthesubcultureoftheirminorityreligious
communityandthecultureofthedominantIslamicandlaterChristianmajority.InalAndalus,HebrewpoetsfamouslyadaptedClassicalArabicliterarymodelsinHebrew,
producingwhatarenowconsideredtheclassicsofHebrewliterature.(Drory2000)Under
Christianrule,theprestigeofAndalusiliteraryculturecontinuedexerciseconsiderable
I will use the Sephardic pronunciation of the Hebrew plural Sefaradim (sing. Sefardí) instead of the Anglicized
Ashkenazi pronunciation, “Sephardim.”
Thisistheauthor’spostprintversion.Forpurposesofacademicpublicationpleasecitepublisher’s
version:Wacks,DavidA.“TranslationinDiaspora:SephardicSpanish-HebrewTranslationsintheSixteenth
Century.”AComparativeHistoryofLiteraturesintheIberianPeninsula.Ed.CésarDomínguez,AnxoAbuín
González,andEllenSapega.Vol.2.Amsterdam:Benjamins,2016.351–363.DOI:10.1075/chlel.xxix.30wac
1
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 2
influenceonJewishintellectualssuchasJudahal-Harizi,whofirsttranslatedtheArabic
maqamatofal-HaririintoHebrewbeforepenninghisownworkinthatgenre,the
Tahkemoni.(al-Harizi2001)TheteamsoftranslatorsworkingunderArchbishopRaymond
inthetwelfthcenturyandKingAlfonsoXinthethirteenthincludedseveralJewish
translatorswhorenderedArabictextsintoCastilian.(GonzálezPalencia1942;Burnett
1994;MárquezVillanueva2004,179;Roth1990,58)Later,inthefifteenthcentury,Jewish
andconversoauthorsworkedtotranslatetextsfromclassicalantiquityintoCastilian,
Catalan,andHebrew.(Roth2002,186;Round1993)
HereIwilldiscussthreetranslationsfromSpanishtoHebrewmadeinthesixteenth
centurybySephardicwriters.Allthreeoriginalsareverywell-knowntostudentsof
Spanishliterature:FernandodeRojas’Celestina(1499),RodríguezdeMontalvo’sAmadísde
Gaula(1507),andFranciscoLópezdeGómara’sHistoriaGeneraldelasIndias(1552).Given
thetremendouspopularityoftheseworks,themerefactoftheirtranslationitselfis
perhapsnotnotable.However,whentakentogetherasexamplesofdiasporiccultural
productionoftheSepharadim,theJewsexpelledfromtheIberianPeninsula,webeginto
seeadifferentpicture.Theirtranslatorssoughttoappropriatethesetextsandplacethem
intheserviceofaJewishliteraryculture,onewhosevalueswereoftenatoddswiththose
oftheoriginalauthorsandreadersoftheSpanishoriginals.Atthesametime,the
SepharadimweredeeplyidentifiedwithIberianvernacularculture,andthesetranslations
wereaformofculturalcapitaluponwhichtheytradedinthebroaderJewishcontextof
WesternChristendomandtheOttomanEmpire.Thelensofdiasporacanhelpustobetter
understandSephardictranslationfromSpanishtoHebrewbyfocusingonthesignificance
oflanguageuse,culturalidentity,andJewishliterarycultureinthesixteenthcentury.
I’dliketobeginbydiscussingtheconceptofdiasporaandwhatitmeansforcultural
production,thentouchonthesignificanceoftheSephardicdiasporafromtheIberian
Peninsulaforourreadingofthesetranslations,thendiscussthetranslationsthemselves,
givingtextualexamplesofhowthetranslatorsbroughtthesetextsoverfromanational,
imperialliterarydiscourseinSpanishtoaJewish,diasporicliterarydiscourseinHebrew.
Diaspora
DiasporaisaGreekwordthatdescribesthebroadscatteringofapeopleasiftheywere
seedsscatteredacrossseveralfurrowsinafield.Initsoriginalusageitdescribedthe
colonizationofpeopledispersingfrommetropolistocoloniesinordertoreproduce
Imperialauthorityinconqueredlands.IntheGreektranslationoftheHebrewBibleitcame
tomeanthedispersionoftheJewsfromZionthroughouttheMediterraneanandMiddle
East.Sincethenithascometobeappliedtorangeofhistoricalscatterings:African,Indian,
Chinese,Armenian,andothers.
UltimatelydiasporiccultureisadiscussionaboutHere(thehostland)andThere
(thehomeland).WhatdidwetakewithusfromThere?WhatarewedoingwithitHere?
When(andunderwhatcircumstances)arewegoingbackThere?Andwhathappenswhen
historyconspirestomakeHereanewThere?Or,astheanthropologistJamesCliffordputs
it,“whatevertheireschatologicallongings,diasporicculturesarenot-heretostay.Diaspora
culturesthusmediate,inalivedtension,theexperiencesofseparationandentanglement,
oflivinghereandremembering/desiringanotherplace.”(1994,311)
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 3
JewishthinkingaboutDiaspora(Hebrewgalutor‘exile’)iseschatologicaland
providential.ThedispersionfromTheretoHereisnotmerelyastoryofhumanaction;itis
divineplan.Itacceptsasagiventwopropheticideas:thefirst,thattheJewishdispersion
fromZionisdivinelyordained,andthesecond,thattheireventualreturnwillannouncethe
comingoftheMessiah.Theseideas,however,donotalwayscorrespondtothelivedreality
ormaterialaspirationsofhistoricalmedievalandearlymodernJewishcommunities,
whosefortunesaredefinedmorebypoliticalvicissitudesandinternalpoliticsthanby
Messianicconsiderationsrealorimaginary.Thequestionofgalutdoes,however,playan
importantroleintheliterarypracticeoftheSepharadim,andtoacertainextentthe
translationsweexamineherebearwitnesstobothaspects:thehistoricalrealityandthe
diasporicimaginary.
Forpurposesofarticulatingatheoryofdoublediasporathatspanspre-andpost1492Sephardicculture,IfindmostproductivetheapproachofKhachigTölölyan,whohas
writtenextensivelyontheArmeniandiaspora.Heproposesaparadigmofdiasporicculture
basedonthefollowingelements:
1) acollectivemourningforatraumathatshapesculturalproductionindiaspora
2) preservationofelementsofthecultureofthehomeland
3) arhetoricofturningandre-turningtowardthehomeland(butnotnecessarilyan
actualrepatriation)
4) anetworkofdiasporiccommunitiesthatarecharacterizedbydifference
betweeneachotherandovertime.(2007)
Tölölyan’sformulationrespectsthepowerofthesymbolichomelandwhilestillbeing
sensitivetothedynamismandemergentnatureofsocialsystemsindiaspora.Whereas
traditionalJewishscholarshipwritesofa‘return’tothehomeland,whetherrealor
imagined,Tölölyanwritesthatdiasporicpeople‘turnandre-turn’towardthehomeland
whilerecognizingthattheymaintaindynamicattachmentstobothhomelandandhostland.
Forhim,“thediasporiccommunityseesitselfaslinkedtobutdifferentfromthoseamong
whomithassettled;eventually,italsocomestoseeitselfaspowerfullylinkedto,butin
somewaysdifferentfrom,thepeopleinthehomelandaswell.”(2007)Hisapproachisalso
compatiblewiththisprojectbecauseheseekstodrawconnectionsbetweenearlierand
laterdiasporas,andinabroadersensetothinkaboutthesocialandculturalprocessesthat
obtainindiasporasasanalogoustoemergentformsofculturethatgrowfromother
transnational,globalizingexperienceswhereidentificationwithanationstatecompetes
withotherformsofidentification:
atitsbestthediasporaisanexample,fortheboththehomeland’sandthe
hostland’snation-states,ofthepossibilityofliving,eventhrivinginthe
regimesofmultiplicitywhichareincreasinglytheglobalcondition,and
properversionofwhichdiasporasmayhelptoconstruct,givenhalfachance.
Thestatelesspowerofdiasporasliesintheirheightenedawarenessofboth
theperilsandtherewardsofmultiplebelonging,andintheirsometimes
exemplarygrapplingwiththeparadoxesofsuchbelonging,whichis
increasinglytheconditionthatnon-diasporannationalsalsofaceinthe
transnationalera.(1996,7–8)
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 4
EngagementwiththeoriessuchasTölölyan’scanbeacorrectivetotheshortcomingsof
traditionalapproachestothestudyoftheJewishdiaspora(s),andinparticulartothe
Sephardicdiaspora.Theoriesofnon-Jewishdiasporasbeginwiththepremisethat
diasporicculturesareaproductofhumanactionsandmundanematerialandsocial
conditionsthatinturngeneratesymbolic,religious,orspiritualnarratives.Assuch,they
canhelpthescholartorespectthehistoricalspecificityofindividualJewishcommunitiesor
individualJewsintheirdiasporicity,ratherthanattempttoadducethemtoabroad
collectivediasporicconsciousnessthatunitesallJewseverywhere.Withthat,Iwouldlike
todiscusstheSephardicdiasporicdifferenceandhowitcanhelpusbetterunderstandthe
signifcanceofSephardictranslationfromSpanishtoHebrew.
TheSephardiccase:DoublediasporaandTranslation
Doublediasporaisatermthatreferstoagroupthathasgonethroughtwosuccessive
diasporas.Criticshaveappliedittoanumberofdifferentpopulationsandarangeof
experiencesofmigrationsandtransnationalitineraries.Newexamplescontinuetoemerge.
(Alkalay-Gut2002,459;Gabriel2004,28–29;MacLean2010;NguyenThiLienHang1995;
Parmar2013;Gupta,Gupta,andTeaiwa2007,13;Pirbhai2009,75;Schwartz2010)
SephardicJewslivedforwellover1,000yearsinSpain.Aftertheirexpulsionfrom
Spainin1492theyformedanew,seconddiaspora,throughoutthemediterraneanand
Europe,turningthistimebothtoZionandtoSpainintheirimaginationsandlongingfor
notone,buttwohomelands.
Whatistheroleoftranslationindiasporicculturalproduction?Diasporic
populationsarebynaturemultilingual.Theytypicallyuseoneormorediasporiclanguages
broughtfromthehomelandinadditiontooneormorelanguagesofthehostland.Itfollows
thattranslationacrosstheselanguageswouldbeanimportantpartoftheirculturallife.
Andyet,despitethevastscholarshipondisaporicculture,wehavepaidverylittlespecific
attentiontotheroletranslationplaysintheculturallifeofdiasporicpeoples.The
bibliographyonJewishtranslation,whileample,doesnotapproachtranslationfromthis
angle.(Singerman2002)
Agoodstartingpointforthediscussionoftranslationindiasporaisthenational
context,sincediasporaasatheoreticalframeworkisoftenpresentedastransgressingor
correctingtheprojectofnationallanguagesandliteratures.KhachigTölölyannotesthat
diasporicculturesprovidehistoricalmodelsofstrategiesfornegotiatingthe“postnational”or“transnational”globalizedworld”:Thestatelesspowerofdiasporasliesintheir
heightenedawarenessofboththeperilsandtherewardsofmultiplebelonging,andintheir
sometimesexemplarygrapplingwiththeparadoxesofsuchbelonging,whichis
increasinglytheconditionthatnon-diasporannationalsalsofaceinthetransnationalera.”
(1996,8)JamesCliffordarguesthatdiasporicculturescanneverbe“inpractice,be
exclusivelynationalist.Theyaredeployedintransnationalnetworksbuiltfrommultiple
attachments.”(1994,307)Morerecentscholarshiphascultivatedthisapproach.For
example,AllisonSchachter’sstudyofmodernYiddishliteratureindiasporapromises“new
avenuesfortheorizingthevexedrelationshipbetweenmodernismandnationalliterary
history.”(2012,15)
LawrenceVenutihaswrittenontranslationaspartofanationalistculturalagenda.
Accordingtohim,
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 5
Foreigntextsarechosenbecausetheyfallintoparticulargenresandaddress
particularthemeswhileexcludingothergenresandthemesthatareseenas
unimportantfortheformationofanationalidentity;translationstrategies
drawonparticulardialects,registers,andstyleswhileexcludingothersthat
arealsoinuse;andtranslatorstargetparticularaudienceswiththeirwork,
excludingotherconstituencies.(2005,189–190)
Herewemightsubstitutediasporicidentityfornationalidentityinourdiscussionofthe
Sephardiccase,butVenuti’sobservationsareusefulforourdiscussionoftheHebrew
Amadís,Celestina,andHistoriadelasIndiasinthattheworkofbringingoverthetextfrom
oneculturalsettingtoanotherissimilar,eveniftheideologiesandstructuresofnational
anddiasporicliteraryculturesdiffer.Inbothcases,thereisatensionbetweentheliterary
cultureoftheoriginalandthatofthetranslation,atensionthetranslatorexpresses,often
inverydirectandnotparticularlysubtleinterventions.Anationalliteraryculturedraws
boundaries,andthereisapriceforcrossingthoseboundaries.CommentingonVictor
Hugo’sobservations,VenutinotesthatShakespeare’sFrenchtranslator,PierreLetourneur,
neededtofirstabuseShakespeare’stextinordertoassimilateittoFrenchliteraryculture:
[Victor]Hugoremarksthat‘LetourneurdidnottranslateShakespeare;he
parodiedhim,ingenuously,withoutwishingit,unknowinglyobedienttothe
hostiletasteofhisepoch.’Letourneur’sdecisiontotranslateShakespeare
deviatedfromcontemporaryFrenchliterarycanon,buthisdiscursive
strategyunconsciouslyconformedtothem.(2005,181)
OurtranslatorsTsarfati,Algaba,andHakohenarenotworkingwithintheboundsofa
nationalcanonaswasLetourneur,buttheyareworkingwithinaliterarytraditionthat
functionsinsimilarwaysasanationalcanoninthecreationofadiasporicculturalidentity.
WhileLetourneur’saim(atleastaccordingtoVenuti)wastoassimilateShakespearetothe
valuesoftheFrenchnationalcanon,ourSephardictranslatorsweredoingsomething
similar,appropriatingtheprestigeandauthorityofSpanishbest-sellersforawiderJewish
audience,onethattheSephardimcametodominateculturallyinmanyofthecommunities
wheretheysettledfollowingtheirexpulsionfromSpainandPortugal.
TheseSpanishtoHebrewtranslations,fromalanguageofnationalandimperial
cultureintooneofadiasporiclanguageoflearning,constituteareappropriationofthetext,
analignmentwiththevaluesofthediasporiccommunity.Theywerereauthorizingthe
worksforconsumptionbythebroaderJewishcommunity,sotheirmotivesfortranslation
werenottomaketheworksinquestionintelligibletothemselves,butrathertorepresent
someversionofSpanishorSephardicculturetothebroaderJewishworld.Inordertoput
thisquestioninitshistoricallinguisticcontext,afewwordsaboutlanguageuseinthe
Sephardicdiasporaareinorder.
SpanishasaJewishlanguage
LadinoorJudeo-Spanish,thevernacularoftheSepharadim,wasnotunderstoodbymostof
itsspeakersasanenclavelanguage,orasastrongholdofSpanishidentityoutsideofSpain,
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 6
anymorethanYiddishwasviewedasaGermantradition.BothareunderstoodasJewish
languages,andasavehicleforJewish,minoritariandiscourse.It’sdifficulttosaywhen
SpanishmadethistransitionfromIberiantoJewishlanguageintheSephardicperception,
buttherewascertainlyaperiodwhenitwasunderstood—howeverproblematically—as
both.HenryMéchoulan,inhisstudyofaLadinotextfromseventeenthcenturySephardic
text,AbrahamPereyra’sLacertezadelcamino(TheCertaintyofthePath),commentson
thissplitvalorizationofSpanishasboththelanguageoftheSephardiccommunity,andof
theSpanishstatefromwhichtheSepharadimwereexpelledandexcluded:
WhiletheJewsofAmsterdamloathedtheSpanishinquisitionandcelebrated
itsmartyrs,theiridentificationwithSpanishcultureappearsintherelatively
pureversionofSpanishtheyusedbothintheirreligiousworshipandintheir
writings.Tothem(andtomanyJewsinItaly)Spanishwasa‘semi-sacred
language.’AsMenassehbenIsraelwastoputit,itwasthelanguageof‘my
fatherland.’(1987,37and61)
Thisexample,ascompellingasitis,cannotbetakenasrepresentative.Atanygiven
momentSepharadimlikelyespousedawiderangeofbeliefsandpracticesregardingthe
useofSpanishandtheirpersonalandcollectiverelationshipswithSpainandSpain’s
currentrulers.Butthemultivalenceoftherelationship,theambiguityandtensioninthe
valorizationofSpanishandSpanishcultureisaconstant,andonethatisworththinking
aboutaswetakeacloserlookattheHebrewtranslationsofCelestina,AmadísdeGaula,and
HistoriaGeneraldelasIndias.
Tsarfati’sCelestina
Ourfirsttranslationis,afterDonQuijote,oneofthemostwidelyreadandtaughtworksof
earlyCastilianliterature:Celestina,firstpublishedin1499.FernandodeRojas,sothestory
goes,wasayounglawstudentinSalamancawhenhesatdownoneSpringbreaktopolisha
roughdraftofastoryofadopeysuitor,hisearnestloveobject,andawilyoldex-prostitute
namedCelestina.Bythebeginningoftermhehadafinaldraft,andhisCelestina,wentonto
becomeamajorbest-seller,perhapsthefirstbest-sellerinCastilian.(Whinnom1980,193)
DeRojas’book—neithertheaternornovel—wastranslatedinshortorderintoanumber
ofotherlanguages,andin1506anItaliantranslationbyoneAlfonsoOrdóñez,aregularat
thePapalCourt,appearedinRome.InthefollowingyearJosephTsarfatitranslatedDe
Rojas’workintoHebrew.
Tsarfati’sbiographyistheproductofaculturewhereJewishintellectualswere
perhapsevenmoreintegratedtotheliterarylifeofthedominantculturethantheywerein
Spain(McPheeters1966,399–402;Bonfil1994,153).ItalianJewsaccomplishedthishigh
levelofintegrationbyconstantlymediating“throughadoption,adaptation,and
modification.”(Stow2001,68)
ThemerefactthatTsarfatiakaGalla(Tsarfatimeans‘TheFrenchman’)wason
personaltermswiththePopehimself,bothascourtphysiciantoJuliusIIandLeoXandas
hosttoClementVII,whospentafewdayslivinginTsarfati’shouse,tellsusthatthiswasa
manwhowasnotonlywelcomeatcourtbutmusthaveexercisedconsiderableinfluence.
(Carpenter1997,273)ThefactthathewasproficientinLatinlikewisetellsusagreatdeal
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 7
abouttheextenttowhichhewasintegratedintothedominantintellectualculture(though
asacourtJewinPapalRomesuchknowledgeofLatinislessremarkablethanitwasin,for
example,IsaacAbravanel’scaseinlatefifteenth-centurySpain).Latinwassomething
approachingastatelanguageinthePapalStates.
ThefactthatTsarfatitranslatedCelestinaintoHebrewisalsonotparticularly
astonishing.ThoughitpredatesbynearlyhalfacenturythepublicationofJacobAlgaba’s
HebrewAmadísdeGaulaandJosephHakohen’sHistoriadelasIndias,ifanyCastilianbestsellerweretobeconsideredfortranslationintoHebrew,Celestinawasanaturalchoice.It
was,weshouldremember,themost-printedworkinCastilianofthesixteenthcentury.
(Whinnom1980,193)
OurreadingofTsarfati’stranslationissomewhatconstrainedbythefactthatwe
don’tactuallyhaveit.ThebodyofDeRojas’workTsarfatirenderedintoHebrewisgone,
andwehaveonlyTsarfati’sintroductorypoem.Whatismostinterestingaboutthispoemis
theywayinwhichTsarfatisubtlylocatesCelestinainSephardicliteraryhistory,doingthe
workdescribedbyVenutiinhisdiscussionofLetourneur’stranslationofShakespeare.He
authorizesCelestinaforSephardicaudiencesbyemphasizingitscontinuitywithmedieval
HebrewbookswrittenbySephardicauthorsandpopularwithearlyprintaudiencesinthe
Sephardicworld.
Inordertodoso,Tsarfatimustshiftthereaders’focusawayfromthefascinating
trainwreckofaromancebetweenCalistoandMelibeaandontothemisogynous
representationofCelestinaherself,placingherinatraditionofliterarygo-betweensin
Hebrewthatdependedheavilyonclassictropesofmisogyny.MichelleHamiltonnotesthat
Tsarfati“underscoresthemisogynistaspectofLaCelestina,backingitupwithaseriesof
misogynistimagesfromtheJudeo-Spanishgo-betweentradition."(2002,332)
ForTsarfati,theCelestinaisaboutthewilesofwomenandthelengthstowhichthey
willgotodeceivemenandentrapthem.Thisishardlyhowonemightcasuallysummarize
DeRojas’work.ThehaplesssuitorCalistogoestogreatlengthsandnolittleexpenseto
wooMelibea,who,atleastatfirst,haslittleuseforhisattentions.IfanythingitisCalisto
whoispursuingMelibea–quitetheoppositeofthepictureTsarfatipaintsinhis
introductorypoem,wherehesingsof“cunningcrones”who“laytheirtrapse’erwhere.”
(Carpenter1997,278)
DavidandSolomonattest
toyouofwomen’sguileandbonds;
Inthemresideangelsofdeath,
Aswelladevilandhisthrongs.
Eachdaytheycarryoffthesons
Ofmen;allcreaturestheyoppress.
Escapetheircharms;discerntheirflaws,
Pollutedfleshincomelydress.
(Carpenter1997,279,ll.39–41.Hebrewonp.280)
Tsarfatithusfocusesthereaders’attention,predeterminingthethemesoftheworkasthe
basenatureofwomen,theexemplarityoftheprotagonistsasparticipantsina“warof
lovers.”ThisheachievesbysettingthestageforDeRojaswithamixtureofGender
polemicexpressedinmartialBiblicallanguagetypicalofmedievalHebrewgender
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 8
narratives,themisogynousrepresentationofthego-betweencharacter,andimagesofthe
trapsandsnaresusedbywomentobindmen.
Tsarfati’simageryhereveryspecificallyrecallstwoearlytwelfth-centuryHispanoHebrewworksofmisogynousnarrative:JudahibnShabbeay’sMinhatYehudah,Sone
Hanashim,andchaptersixofJudahal-Harizi’sTahkemoni,thatrelatesthestoryofayoung
mandeceivedbyawilyoldgo-between.(Hamilton2002,336–339)Allofthesetropes
appearintheCastilianCelestinabutnoneisofcentralimportanceastheyareinTsarfati’s
poem.Theyare,however,centralthemesofasubstantialbodyofmisogynousnarrative
thatflourishedinIberia,France,andItalyinthesixteenthcentury,andsoTsarfati’spoemis
abridgebetweenCelestinaandthebroadermisogynousliteratureinthevernacularsatthe
turnofthesixteenthcentury.ThisisabridgebuiltfromblocksofmedievalHebrew
narrativethatwerecirculatinginprinteditionsalongsidevernacularworksgivingvoiceto
preciselythesamemisogynoustropesandimageryfoundinworkssuchastheCastilian
CorbachoofAlfonsoMartínezdeToledo,theCatalanSomniofBernatMetge,ortheFrench
Quinzejoiesdemariage.(Archer2004)
ThroughtheHebrewtranslation,TsarfatiisrepresentingdeRojas’quintessentially
SpanishfictionasquintessentiallySephardicaswell.Byframinghistranslationinthe
imageryandlanguageofSephardicliterarytraditionheislayingclaimtotheworkasa
Sephardicworkofliterature.Thisisagreatexampleofthedissonancethatwascommonin
WesternSephardicliterarycultureofEarlyModernity.Sephardicauthorswerevery
stronglyidentifiedwiththevernacularcultureoftheirancestralhomelandbutoften
politicallyantipathictotheSpanishcrownandtoSpanishsocietyingeneral.
Celestinaislow-hangingfruitforsuchareadership.DeRojas’critiqueofthe
mannersandsensibilityofthenobilityisquiteplain.(Severin1989,23–24;Kaplan2002,
106–128)Hissend-upofthenobleprotagonistwouldlikelyappealtoreadersalienated
fromtheSpanishrulingclass.Asiswell-known,deRojashimselfwasfromaconverso
family.ThisisnottosaythathewasthebearerofanyJewishliterarytradition—thereis
noevidencethathewasatallknowledgeableofbasicJewishreligion,letalonewith
difficultHebrewliterarytexts.However,thediscriminationandsocialscrutinythatwere
oftenthelotofeducatedconversosthatfueleddeRojas’critiqueofthevaluesoftheruling
classwouldhaveresonatedwithSepharadimlivingindiasporafromSpain.
Algaba’sAmadísdeGaula
AnotherSpanishbestsellerthatfounditswayintoHebrewwasGarciRodríguezde
Montalvo’schivalricnovelAmadísdeGaula,translatedintoHebrewbyJacobAlgabain
Constantinoplein1554.TheHebrewAmadísisasignificantculturalmoment,a
reappropriationofthevaluesoftheSpanishchivalricnovelinanOttomanSephardic
setting.ItisasimultaneousdeploymentofSpanishcultureasanengineofSephardic
prestigeandarejectionoftheimperialculture,substitutinginitsplaceareadingthat
reflectsthevaluesofadiasporicminority.InthefaceoftheSepharadim’srejectionfrom
theSpanishimperium,Algaba’sAmadísduplicatesaspectsofSpanishculturalimperialism
withinJewishcommunitiesoftheOttomanEmpire.
OnecommonstrategyofAlgabaistode-Christianizethetext,removingreferences
thatmightoffendJewishsensibilities.(ArmisteadandSilverman1965;Armisteadand
Silverman1982,138).Itisnoteworthythatinmostofthesecasesheavoidssubstituting
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 9
specificallyJewishtermsorconcepts.Algaba’sAmadísisthefirstmajornarrativeworkina
registerofHebrewthatislargelyfreeofthedenseweaveofshibbutzim,cleverBiblicaland
rabbinicalallusionsthatwascharacteristicofnearlyeveryotherworkofHebrewprose
beingpublishedatthetime.
InAlgaba’stranslation,priestsbecomelaymen,oathsaresecularized,and
moralizingdigressions(towhichMontalvowasfamouslyinclined)aresimplyomitted.
(Piccus2004,187)Mostoftheseexamplesaresuperficialandpredictable.WhenAmadís
exclaims“SaintMary!”Algabasubstitutes‘LonglivemyLordtheKing!’(Rodríguezde
Montalvo1996,235;Malachi1981,7).MontalvohastheQueenleadAmadísintoher
“chapel”,whichAlgabarendersas“chamber”(RodríguezdeMontalvo1996,276;Malachi
1981,28).Elsewhere,Amadíscomesuponawoundedknightintheroadwhoaskstobe
takentoan“hermitaño”(Anchorite)whomight‘tendtohissoul’,whichAlgabarendersas
‘someonewhomighthealme’.(RodríguezdeMontalvo1996,280;Malachi1981,29)
MostoftheexamplesofAlgaba’sde-Christianizationofthetextaresimilarly
predictableandroutine,butsomemeritinterpretation.WhenKingLanguinesordersa
traitorouswomanburnttodeath,Algabainsteadhasherthrowntoherdeathfromahigh
tower.Hisreluctancetodepictherbeingburnedmaybeoutofrespecttovictimsofthe
SpanishInquisition.Insteadhesuppliesaready-madephrasefromtheHebrewBible
describingthefateJezebelmeetsaspunishmentforhersins.2
AnimportantpartoftheappealofMontalvo’sAmadíswasitsrepresentationof
Arthurianchivalricmannersandspeech.PartofthefantasythatMontalvowassellingtohis
readerswastoclothethefictionalchivalricherointhecourtlymoresofMontalvo’stime,to
blendinhisprotagonisttheimaginedcourtlyworldoftheknightserrantofArthurian
imaginationwiththespeechandcourtlycultureoftheSpanishélite.
ThispresentedaparticularproblemforAlgaba’sreaders,whowerelikely
unfamiliarwiththeEuropeantraditionsofchivalricbehaviorcommontobothchivalric
fictionandtothesociallifeoftheWesternEuropeanupperclasses.Hischallengewasto
renderMontalvo’sfrequentrepresentationsofthechivalricimaginaryintelligibletononSephardicOttomanJewswhilestillretainingtheculturalcachetandnoveltyoftheworldit
representedtohisreaders.Itstandstoreasonthatnon-SephardicJews,whohadnever
livedinChristianEuropewouldbeunfamiliarwiththeinstitutionsandpracticesofchivalry
thatformthefabricofthesocialworldofAmadís.Youcannot,ofcourse,tradeonforeign
cachéthatistotallyincomprehensibletoyouraudience.TothisendAlgabatailors
Montalvo’sreferencestotheinstitutionsofchivalry,socialconventions,andcourtly
practicesthatmayhavefallenoutsidetheexperienceofhisnon-Sephardicreaders.Asin
theexamplesofde-Christianization,somesuchexamplesaresuperficial,buttellingof
differencesofexpectationsofwhat‘courtly’or‘chivalric’mightmeantonon-Sephardic,
Jewishaudiences.Acharacternamed‘ladoncelladelaguirnalda’(‘thedamselofthe
garland’),sonamedbecauseshealwaysworeagarlandofflowerstoaccentuateher
beautifulhair,becomesinAlgaba’sversionthe‘damselofthecrown,’anaccessorythat
ostensiblymademoresensetotheOttomanreaderstowhomagarlandofflowersmight
Montalvo writes simply “mandóla quemar” (‘he ordered that she be burned’), while Algaba moralizes a bit,
drawing on the context of the Biblical allusion to the death of Jezebel (1 Kings 9: 30-37: “‘Drop this accursed
woman!’ And so they dropped her from a high tower and she died in all of her wickedness (b’rov rasha`tah)”.
(Rodríguez de Montalvo 1996, 301; Malachi 1981, 42)
2
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 10
haveseemedmorerusticthanelegant.(RodríguezdeMontalvo1996,227;Malachi1981,
1)
AlgabalikewiseinterpretstheSpanishvocabularyofsocialrankforhisHebrew
readers.WhenHelisenaappealstothehonorofKingPerión’ssquire,sheaskshimifheis
anhidalgo(noblemanoflowrank);bythisshemeans‘areyouanhonorableindividualwith
whomIcantrustmysecret?’Algabapreservestheequationofhighbirthandgoodmoral
conductimpliedbythewordhidalgobuthisHelisenaasksthesquire‘whoareyouand
yourfamily?Aretheyhighborn?(me`olah,literally‘superior’or‘fine’).(Rodríguezde
Montalvo1996,235;Malachi1981,7)
Intheseways,AlgababringstheworldofAmadísthediscourseofMontalvoover
intotheOttomanJewishworld,simultaneouslydemonstratinganaffiliationwithand
resistencetothecultureitrepresents.
Hakohen’sHistoriadelasIndias
TheSephardicinterestinchivalricfeatsofarmswasmatchedbyacuriosityaboutrealworldconquests.Infact,thetwoarelinkedintheSephardicimagination.Inthe
introductiontohistranslationofAmadísdeGaula,JacobAlgabanotesthatonemaylearn
muchabouthowtheworldworksbyreadingaboutthelivesanddeedsofgreatkings,
whetherfictionalorreal.(RodríguezdeMontalvo1981,2)
Duringthefirsthalfofthesixteenthcentury,Jewishwritersbegantowrite
chroniclesandhistoriesthatrecordedeventsofimportancetoJewishcommunities,wars,
calumnies,expulsions,andsoforth.WhilesomehistoriansofJewishculturehave
explainedthisapparentlysuddeninterestinhistoriographyasareactiontothetraumaof
theexpulsionsfromSpainandfromvariousItaliancitystates,itwasmorelikelysimplya
signofthetimes.(Bonfil1988)Intheageofprint,exploration,andcomplexinternational
tradenetworks,globalpoliticsandhistorywasnowpartofthedossierofagoodJewish
courtierorbusinessman.ThisisevidentalreadyinthehistoricalwritingofIsaacAbravanel,
forwhomhistoryisnot(contraMaimonides)a‘wasteoftime,’butratheranaturalactivity
fortheeliteofanynation.Everynation,heremarks,desirestoknowitspastandtochart
thepassingoftimethroughareminiscenceofkingsandtheirdeeds.(Gutwirth1998,150–
152)
JosephHa-KohenwasanItalianJewofSephardicbackgroundandauthorofa
numberofsecularhistoriesinHebrew.HewasauthorofChronicleoftheKingsofFrance
andoftheSultansoftheHouseofOttoman(Sabionetta1553),andTheValeofTears(1560).
InadditionhetranslatedFranciscoLópezdeGómara’sPrimeraysegundapartedela
HistoriageneraldelasIndias(Zaragoza,1553)intoHebrewwiththetitleSeferHa-’Indias
FerandoKortes(Sp.LibrodelasindiasdeFernandoCortés,‘BookofTheIndiesofHernán
Cortés,’1557).(LeónTello1989,25–35).IntheintroductiontohisChroniclesoftheKingsof
FranceandtheKingsoftheHouseoftheOttomanTurk,hewritesthatitisgoodtolearnof
thedeedsofgreatkingsagainsttheJewssothat“theremembrancethereofnotpassaway
fromamongtheJews;andthememoryofourwrongsshallnotcometoanend”.(Hakohen
1835,2:xx)ButtheHebrewhistoriesofthesixteenthcenturyweremorethanupdated
lamentationsofJewishsuffering;theywereguidebookstoaglobalizingworldthat
negotiatedbetweenimperialcontexts.Thisincreasedinterestininternationalaffairs
shouldcomeasnosurprisegivenJewishinvolvementindiplomacyandinternationaltrade.
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 11
NeithershoulditsurprisethattheJewishcommunitiesoftheMediterraneanshould
havetakenaninterestintheSpanishconquestoftheNewWorld,andafterHakohen
completedhischroniclesofEuropeanandOttomanhistoryheturnedhisattentiontothat
oftheNewWorld,bringingoverintoHebrewtheHistoriageneraldelasindiasofFrancisco
LópezdeGómara,whopublishedhissecond-handaccountoftheconquestoftheIndiesin
Zaragozain1552.Itwaslaterdecriedasfullofinaccuraciesandoverlyrosyinitsportrayal
oftheSpanishcolonialenterprise,andparticularlyinitslionizationofCortéshimself.Such
objectionsnotwithstanding,itprovidedreaderswithadetailed—ifinaccurate—account
ofthegeographic,political,andsocialrealitiesofNewSpain,byanymeasureanexciting
andrelevanttopicofdiscussioninSpainandelsewhere.
WemustkeepinmindthatHakohen’sHistoriadelasIndiasappearedin1557,five
yearsafterFrayBartolomédeLasCasas’BrevísimarelacióndeladestruccióndelasIndias
(1552)discreditedLópezdeGómara’shistoryasablatantfabricationmeanttovalidate
SpanishconquestintheNewWorld.Hakohen’streatmentofGómara’swork,inthespiritof
Venuti’sdescriptionofLetourneur’streatmentofShakespeare,amountstoaseemingly
paradoxical,simultaneousde-authorizationandappropriationofculturalcapital.Why
translateaworkonlytocriticizeandundermineitallthewhile?MosheLazar,themodern
editorofHakohen’stranslation,notesthatHakohenembedsacritiqueoftheSpanish
colonialprojectsimilartothatvoicedbyLasCasasandBernalDíazdelCastillo.(2002,xxv)
HakoheneditorializesliberallyinhistranslationoftheeventsnarratedbyLópezde
Gómara,astrategyroughlyconversetothatofJacobAlgaba’stranslationofAmadísde
Gaula.WhereAlgabaomitsthemoralizingdigressionsthatMontalvoappliedliberallyto
theso-called‘primitive’AmadísdeGaula,Hakohenoverlayshisownideologicalprogram
intohistranslationofHistoriageneraldelasindias,freelyglossingandemendingLópezde
Gómara’stexttobringitinlinewithhisownvaluesandthoseofhisaudience.
Inonestrikingexample,LópezdeGómararecountsthetriumphantreturnof
ChristopherColumbustothecourtoftheCatholicMonarchs,whereheisgivenahero’s
welcome.GómaradescribesthecoatofarmspresentedtotheGenoesenavigator,whichhe
inscribeswithacoupletcelebratinghisownachievements.
ChristopherColumbusputthisinscriptionaroundthecoatofarmsthatthey
gavehim:
ForCastile,andforLeon.
Columbusfoundanewworld.(LópezdeGómara2002,22)
Hakohen,somewhatmorecriticalofColumbus’sproject,glossesthecouplet,first
reproducingitinSpanish(withaslightvariant)inHebrewletters,followedbyapoemof
hisowncomposition:
ForCastileandforLeon
Columbusfoundhalfoftheworld
AndI,JosephHakohen,composedthefollowing,saying:
ForCastile,andalsoforLeon
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 12
Colonfoundanewworld
Butwiththepassageofthesunthroughthesky,
theycrossedintotheValleyofAyalon3
Thereheearnedeternalfame
Fortherehealsofoundacolony
Thusmanynationswerehumbled
Ingreatreproach,contemptanddishonor,
Forthismancrossedthere,
tobecomethemistletoetotheiroak.(LópezdeGómara2002,20)4
ElsewherehefranklycontradictsLópezdeGómara’sversionofevents,offeringa
counterhistorytothehegemonicnarrativeoftheSpanishoriginal.Forexample,Lópezde
Gómara’schapteronsyphilisisplainlytitled“SyphiliscamefromtheIndies”.(Lópezde
Gómara2002,36–37)HeexplainsthatSpanishconquistadorscontractedsyphilisby
havingsexwithindigenouswomenfromtheislandofHispaniola,thenreturnedtoSpain.
SubsequentlytheytraveledtoNaplestofighttheFrench,wheretheyinfectedItalian
womenwiththedisease:
TheinhabitantsofthatislandHispaniolaareallsyphilitic.AndastheSpanish
sleptwiththeIndianwomentheythenbecameinfectedwithsyphilis,that
mostcontagiousdiseasethattormentsonewithfiercepains.Feelingafflicted
andnotimproving,manywentbacktoSpaintorecover,andothersto
conductbusiness,bywhichtheyinfectedmanycourtesanladieswhointurn
infectedmanymenwhowentovertoItalytotheWarofNaplesonthesideof
KingFernandoII,againsttheFrench,andtheretheyspreadtheirdisease.
(LópezdeGómara2002,36–27)
Withoutanycomment,Hakohenturnsthisnarrativecompletelyonitshead,substitutinga
verydifferentepidemiologyoftheColumbianexchangethatrunscountertoLópezde
Gómara’sofficialnarrative.Hakohen’schapteristitled“SyphilisisaFrenchsickness,that
theSpaniardsbroughtfromthere,andtheyalsobroughtthehordeolu(orzuelo,‘stye’)
illness”.5Hisversion,reproducedinnumbernineinyourhandout,differsconsiderably
fromthatofLópezdeGómara:
The Valley of Ayalon (Emeq Ha-ayalon) was where Joshua successfully called on God to stop the trajectory of the
sun across the sky in order to afford the Israelite forces sufficient daylight to rout the Amorites: “Joshua addressed
the Lord; the said in the presence of the Israelites: ‘Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon, /O moon, in the Valley of
Aijalon!’/ And the sun stood still /And the moon halted, /While a nation wreaked judgment on its foes.” Joshua
10:12-13. The allusion is meant to describe a defeat so total that it seemed to be accomplished with divine
assistance.
4 Hakohen’s Hebrew is lehiyot mam’ir alon (literally ‘to be a briar of oak’), most likely a calque from the Italian
vischio di quercia. The modern Hebrew for mistletoe is divkon (‘clinging’ or ‘adhering’ plant). I do not know of any
other witness to Hakohen’s elocution. Mistletoe is a parasitic evergreen plant with green foliage and yellow berries
that grows on oak trees. It may be the botanical inspiration for the golden bough that serves as Aeneas’ key to the
underworld in the Aeneid (6:200-15). On the connection between the golden bough and mistletoe, see (Frazer 1927,
703–704).
5 Hakohen uses the Hebrew term holei ha-tavelei for the Spanish bubas.
3
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 13
TheSpaniardsbroughtsyphilistoItalyfromtheIndieswhentheywentto
Naples,intheyear1494.Theysleptwithwomen,andFrenchalsosleptwith
them,andsyphilisshone[first]intheirforeheadsandintimeatehalfoftheir
flesh....AndtheSpaniardsalsobroughthordeolu(styes)andmorbili
(measles),whichiscalledjidriinArabic,6andsmallpox,whichthe
inhabitantsofthatlandhadneverseenbeforethatday;andmanythousands
ofthemdiedofthosetwoillnesses.Theirtimeoftheir[death]warranthad
comeuponthemthen.(LópezdeGómara2002,30–31)
Thecontrastisdramatic.Hakohenreversesthetrajectoryofinfection,returningtheorigin
ofthepestilencetoEuropeandbackinguphisversionbyaddingdetailsandcitingmedical
authoritiesabsentintheSpanishoriginal.HeisclearlyatoddswithLópezdeGómara,
particularlyasregardsthemoralityofSpain’scolonialproject.
ThishostilitytoSpanishconquestishardlyuniquetoHakohen.Wehavenotedthe
well-knowncaseofLasCasas.TherewereanumberofItalianwritersaswell,themost
prominentamongthembeingGirolamoBenzoni,aMilanesewhosebitterfailuresinhis
brieftimeinthenewworldengenderedinhimavibranthateofallthingsSpanish.Benzoni
givesvoicetothishatredunstintinglyinhisHistoriadelnuovomondo,publishedinVenice
in1565,eightyearsafterHakohenfinisheshistranslationofLópezdeGómara.(Colloand
Crovetto1991,549–589)
ThedifferencebetweenItalianandSephardiccritiquesofSpanishcolonialismisof
coursetheintimateandconflictedrelationshipSehparadimhadwithSpain.LikeAlgaba
andTsarfati,HakohenappropriatestheSpanishtext,puttingintotheserviceofhisown
literarysensibilityandideologicalprogram.Nonetheless,andaswehaveseeninallthree
cases,thisgestureiscomplicatedbytherelationshipbetweenSephardicauthorsandthe
SpanishliteraryculturetheybringoverintoHebrew.
WhenSephardicauthorswriteaboutSpain,oradaptworksbySpanishauthors,they
areinasenseturningandre-turningtowardSpain,butthissymbolicorientationtoward
thediasporichomelandisdifferentfromtheprimaryorientationtowardthebiblicalZionic
homeland.Itisnotframedintermsofaneschatologicaltrajectorytowardredemption,
exceptsecondarily.Thatis,theJewishsourcesdonotofficiallyprivilegeSpainasa
homelandtobelongedfor.However,theculturalaffiliation,theuseofSpanishasa
vernacularandasaliterarylanguage,andthestrongattachmenttothesenseofSephardicnessthataroseoverthelongSephardicpresenceinIberiaalladduptoaturningandreturningtotheSephardichomelandthatintertwinesandalternateswiththedesire(ifnot
theactualproject)ofeventualreturntoZion.
Jidri is Andalusi Arabic for smallpox. The Classical Arabic form is judari. It is interesting that Hakohen is familiar
with the colloquial rather than learned form, which suggests that he learned it in discussion with an Arabic speaker,
rather than from consulting an Arabic book or a Latin or Romance translation of an Arabic book. (Corriente 1997,
91)
6
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 14
Workscited
al-Harizi,Judah.2001.TheBookofTahkemoni:JewishTalesFromMedievalSpain.
TranslatedbyDavidSimhaSegal.London:TheLittmanLibraryofJewish
Civilization.
Alkalay-Gut,Karen.2002.“DoubleDiaspora:EnglishWritersinIsrael.”Judaism.51(4):457.
Archer,Robert.2004.TheProblemofWomaninLate-MedievalHispanicLiterature.London:
Tamesis.
Armistead,Samuel,andJosephSilverman.1965.“ChristianElementsandDeChristianizationintheSephardicRomancero.”InCollectedStudiesinHonorof
AméricoCastro’sEightiethYear,editedbyMarcelHornik,21–38.Oxford:Lincombe
LodgeResarchLibrary.
———.1982.EnTornoAlRomanceroSefardí :(hispanismoyBalcanismodeLaTradición
Judeo-española).Madrid:SeminarioMenéndezPidal.
Bonfil,Robert.1988.“HowGoldenWastheAgeoftheRenaissanceinJewish
Historiography?”HistoryandTheory27(4):78–102.
———.1994.JewishlifeinRenaissanceItaly.TranslatedbyAnthonyOldcorn.Berkeley:
UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Boyarin,Jonathan.“DoubleDiaspora.”
Burnett,Charles.1994.“TheTranslatingActivityinMedievalSpain.”InTheLegacyof
MuslimSpain,1036–1058.Leiden:Brill.
Carpenter,Dwayne.1997.“AConversoBest-Seller:CelestinaandHerForeignOffspring.”In
CrisisandCreativityintheSephardicWorld,editedbyBenjaminR.Gampel,267–281.
NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Clifford,James.1994.“Diasporas.”CulturalAnthropology9(3):302–338.
doi:10.2307/656365.http://www.jstor.org/stable/656365.
Collo,Paolo,andPierLuigiCrovetto,ed.1991.Nuovomondo.Torino:G.Einaudi.
Corriente,Federico.1997.ADictionaryofAndalusiArabic.Leiden:Brill.
Drory,Rina.2000.ModelsandContacts:ArabicLiteratureandItsImpactonMedievalJewish
Culture.Leiden:Brill.
Frazer,JamesGeorge.1927.TheGoldenBough.NewYork:Macmillan.
Gabriel,SharmaniPatricia.2004.“InterrogatingMulticulturalism:DoubleDiaspora,Nation,
andRe-NarrationinRohintonMistry’sCanadianTales.”CanadianLiterature.(181):
27.
GonzálezPalencia,Ángel.1942.ElArzobispoDonRaimundodeToledo.Barcelona:Editorial
Labor.
Gupta,MonishaDas,CharuGupta,andKaterinaMartinaTeaiwa.2007.“RethinkingSouth
AsianDiasporaStudies.”CulturalDynamics19(2/3):125.
Gutwirth,Eleazar.1998.“DonIshaqAbravanelandVernacularHumanisminFifteenth
CenturyIberia.”Bibliothèqued’HumanismeetRenaissance60(3):641–671.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20678424.
Hakohen,Joseph.1835.TheChroniclesofRabbiJosephBenJoshuaBenMeir,theSphardi.
TranslatedbyChristophHeinrichFriedrichBialloblotzky.London:Publishedforthe
OrientalTranslationFundofGreatBritainandIrelandbyR.Bentley.
Hamilton,MichelleM.2002.“JosephbenSamuelSarfati’s«TratadodeMelibeayCalisto»:A
SephardicJew’sReadingoftheCelestinainLightoftheMedievalJudeo-SpanishGobetweenTradition.”SefaradSefarad62(2):329–347.
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 15
Kaplan,Gregory.2002.TheEvolutionofConversoLiterature:TheWritingsoftheConverted
JewsofMedievalSpain.Gainesville:UniversityPressofFlorida.
Lazar,Moshe.2002.“Introduction.”InSeferha-IndiahHa-hadashah,byFranciscoLópezde
Gómara,editedbyMosheLazar,vii–xxvi.Lancaster,Calif.:Labyrinthos.
LeónTello,Pilar.1989.“Introducción.”InElvalledelllanto(’Emeqha-Bakha),byJoseph
Ha-Kohen,9–35.Barcelona:Riodpiedras.
LópezdeGómara,Francisco.2002.Seferha-Indiahha-hadashah.EditedbyMoshe
LazarTranslatedbyJosephHakohen.Lancaster,Calif.:Labirintos.
MacLean,DerrylN.2010.“Religion,Ethnicity,andtheDoubleDiasporaofAsianMuslims.”
InAsianReligionsinBritishColumbia,editedbyLarry(ed.andintrod.)DeVries,Don
(ed.andintrod.)Baker,andDan(ed.andconclusion)Overmyer,64–84.Asian
ReligionsandSocietySeries(AsianReligionsandSocietySeries).Vancouver,BC:U
ofBritishColumbiaP.
Malachi,Zvi.1981.“Introduction.”InʻAlilotHa-abir,byGarciRodríguezdeMontalvo,edited
byTzviMalachi,vii–xvii.TelAviv:TelAvivUniversityPress.
MárquezVillanueva,Francisco.2004.Elconceptoculturalalfonsí.2nded.Barcelona:
Bellaterra.
McPheeters,Dean.1966.“UnatraducciónhebreadelaCelestinaenelsigloXVI.”In
HomenajeaRodríguez-Moñino,editedbyAntonioRRodríguezMoñino,299–311.
Madrid.
Méchoulan,Henry.1987.HispanidadyjudaismoentiemposdeEspinoza:estudioyedición
anotadadeLacertezadelcaminodeAbrahamPereyra,Amsterdam1666.Salamanca,
España:EdicionesUniversidaddeSalamanca.
NguyenThiLienHang.1995.“TheDoubleDiasporaofVietnam’sCatholics.”Orbis39(4):
491.
Parmar,Maya.2013.“ReadingtheDoubleDiaspora:RepresentingGujaratiEastAfrican
CulturalIdentityinBritain.”Unadoblelecturadeladiáspora:larepresentacióndela
identidadculturalgujaratidelestedeÁfricaenGranBretaña.35(1)(June):137–155.
Piccus,Jules.2004.“Corrections,Suppresions,andChangesinMontalvo’sAmadís,BookI.”
InTexturesandMeaning:ThirtyYearsofJudaicStudiesattheUniversityof
MassachusettsAmherst,editedbyLeonardH.Ehrlich,ShmuelBolozky,RobertA.
Rothstein,MurraySchwartz,JayR.Berkovitz,andJamesE.Young,179–211.
Amherst:DepartmentofJudaicandNearEasternStudies,Universityof
Massachusetts.http://www.umass.edu/judaic/anniversaryvolume/index.html.
Pirbhai,Mariam.2009.MythologiesofMigration,VocabulariesofIndenture:Novelsofthe
SouthAsianDiasporainAfrica,theCaribbean,andAsia-Pacific.Toronto:Universityof
TorontoPress.
RodríguezdeMontalvo,Garci.1981.ʻAlilotHa-abir.EditedbyTzviMalachiTranslatedby
JacobAlgaba.TelAviv:TelAvivUniversityPress.
———.1996.AmadísdeGaula.EditedbyJuanManuelCachoBlecua.Madrid:Cátedra.
Roth,Norman.1990.“JewishCollaboratorsinAlfonso’sScientificWork.”InEmperorof
Culture:AlfonsoXtheLearnedofCastileandHisThirteenth-CenturyRenaissance,
editedbyRobertI.Burns,59–71.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvannia.
———.2002.Conversos,Inquisition,andtheExpulsionoftheJewsfromSpain.Madison:
UniversityofWisconsinPress.
Translation in Diaspora
Wacks 16
Round,NicholasG.1993.“Introduction.”InLibroLlamadoFedrón:Plato’sPhaedo,byPlato,
editedbyNicholasG.Round,1–218.London:TamesisBooks.
Schachter,Allison.2012.DiasporicModernisms :HebrewandYiddishLiteratureinthe
TwentiethCentury.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
Scheindlin,RaymondP.2008.TheSongoftheDistantDove:JudahHalevi’sPilgrimage.
Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Schwartz,StephanieTara.2010.“TheConceptofDoubleDiasporainSamiMichael’sRefuge
andNaimKattan’sFarewell,Babylon.”ComparativeStudiesofSouthAsia,Africaand
theMiddleEast30(1):92–100.
Severin,DorothySherman.1989.TragicomedyandNovelisticDiscourseinCelestina.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Singerman,Robert.2002.JewishTranslationHistory:ABibliographyofBibliographiesand
Studies.Amsterdam:J.Benjamins.
Stow,KennethR.2001.TheaterofAcculturation:theRomanGhettointheSixteenthCentury.
Seattle,WA:UniversityofWashingtonPress.
Tölölyan,Khachig.1996.“RethinkingDiaspora(s):StatelessPowerintheTransnational
Moment.”Diaspora5(1):3–36.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/dsp/summary/v005/5.1.tololyan.html.
———.2007.“TheContemporaryDiscourseofDiasporaStudies.”ComparativeStudiesof
SouthAsia,AfricaandtheMiddleEast27(3).
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/comparative_studies_of_south_asia_africa_and_the_m
iddle_east/v027/27.3tololyan.html.
Venuti,Lawrence.2005.“LocalContingencies:TranslationandNationalIdentities.”In
Nation,Language,andtheEthicsofTranslation,editedbySandra(ed.andintrod.)
BermannandMichael(ed.)Wood,177–202.Translation/Transnation
(Translation/Transnation).Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUP.
Whinnom,Keith.1980.“TheProblemoftheBest-sellerinSpanishGolden-AgeLiterature.”
BulletinofHispanicStudiesBulletinofHispanicStudies57(3):189–198.