É. Apor , I. Ormos (ed.): Goldziher Memorial Conference, June 21–22, 2000, Budapest.
HOPKINS, Simon: The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher
SIMON HOPKINS This first major publication of Goldziher's is a work of Arabic philology, more precisely Judaeo-Arabic philology, at its very best. We see here all the penetration, based upon the vast knowledge, sure control, analytical skill, imagination and plain common sense which are so characteristic of his larger and more celebrated writings. Already in this book, published while still in his teens, Goldziher displayed a level of learning and a philological expertise which immediately placed him in the most exalted company. A mere glance at the footnotes, for example that on pleonastic he in the Talmud (48 n.t) or that on >1—> "all" (U" n.4), is necessary in order to realise that this is the work of no ordinary author, but the product of a very distinguished scholarly mind. One reads the four masterly chapters of this youthful Inauguraldissertation today with a genuine sense of awe, which is only increased when one reflects upon the scant resources then available to its nineteen-year-old author. 20 2 What is more, this work was composed at the same time as the Encyclopädie der semitischen Philologie and the Lexicon der hebräischen grammatischen Terminologie which were mentioned above §2. Fleischer was a superb grammarian and textual philologist of the main Islamic languages, Arabic, Persian and Turkish. Studien über Tanchűm Jerüschalmi was written, nominally at least, under his guidance and is a work of a markedly linguistic and textual character. Goldziher did not follow further along the formal philological path of his Leipzig teacher; he did, however, follow him very much into the world of Arabic and Islam. Goldziher's interests now took their own course, away from the linguistic and textual philology practised by Fleischer towards the wider pastures of culture, religion and the history of ideas in Islam. In this Goldziher himself admitted the influence of scholars such as the aforementioned Steinthal, A. von Kremer 2" 5 and A. Geiger. 2" 4 At this stage in his career, viz. in his late teens and early twenties, it was the history of linguistic thought and attitude to language that particularly attracted him. The Semitic and Hebrew aspects of this interest were given expression in the Encyclopädie der semitischen Philologie and Lexicon der hebräischen grammatischen Terminologie, both of which belong to this period. Goldziher, under the influence of Fleischer, 2" 5 now turned to the linguistic culture of Arabic. In order to pursue his studies of this aspect of Arabic civilisation he embarked upon a series bears a triple dedication "by the author and the translator" to H. L. Fleischer, F. Max Müller and H. Vámbéry, "the pioneers of Semitic, Aryan and Turco-Tataric philology ". Cf. too above n. 144 a. 20 2 Actually, eighteen-year-old, for according to the Tagebuch 39-40, 42 the work was ready for submission before Goldziher even arrived in Leipzig. If so, Fleischer's supervision may have been of a merely nominal kind. 20 3 See Simon, Letters 31 -33. 20 4 See Conrad, JRAS 1990, 237-239; 'Pilgrim from Pest' t23ff., 139, 145; 'Ignaz Goldziher on Ernest Renan' 143-144 and the references in the accompanying notes. For the influence of Geiger, particularly important is the passage in Tagebuch 123. 20 5 Tagebuch 44-45. 20 6 Tagebuch 41-42. 126
