Scholarlink

<p>This essay examines a responsa by Moses Schreiber (Ḥatam Sofer) in which he addresses the implications of print and mechanical reproduction for Jewish books. Schreiber’s approach to print is strikingly ambivalent. On the one hand, he was an active and influential figure in the world of Hebrew printing—regulating printing activity, supporting publishers, endorsing books, and writing <i>haskamot</i> (approbations). On the other hand, he adamantly refused to allow his own writings to be printed. While scholarship on Schreiber has noted and documented this refusal, the present essay offers an additional layer of interpretation. I argue that Schreiber’s objections to the printing of his own work open a window onto his working methods and his views on scholarship and knowledge. Reading his responsa through two conceptual frameworks—<i>migrating knowledge</i> and the <i>history of the book</i>—this essay explores questions of the creation, transmission, and transformation of knowledge; the contrasting qualities attributed to hand-copied and press-printed texts; and the perceived fixity of the printed book and its impact on scholarly practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Of Making Many Books [in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction]: The Ḥatam Sofer on Print, Scholarship, and Knowledge

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月1日

查看全文
  • Vered Sakal

摘要

This essay examines a responsa by Moses Schreiber (Ḥatam Sofer) in which he addresses the implications of print and mechanical reproduction for Jewish books. Schreiber’s approach to print is strikingly ambivalent. On the one hand, he was an active and influential figure in the world of Hebrew printing—regulating printing activity, supporting publishers, endorsing books, and writing haskamot (approbations). On the other hand, he adamantly refused to allow his own writings to be printed. While scholarship on Schreiber has noted and documented this refusal, the present essay offers an additional layer of interpretation. I argue that Schreiber’s objections to the printing of his own work open a window onto his working methods and his views on scholarship and knowledge. Reading his responsa through two conceptual frameworks—migrating knowledge and the history of the book—this essay explores questions of the creation, transmission, and transformation of knowledge; the contrasting qualities attributed to hand-copied and press-printed texts; and the perceived fixity of the printed book and its impact on scholarly practice.