text:
1. It is well-known that the Mishnah in the tenth chapter of Pesachim includes a set of mah nishtannah. But if one opens a standard printed Babylonian Talmud (Pes. 116a), one sees four questions[2] in the text of the Mishnah (matzah, maror, roast, and dipping), while if one opens a standard printed Jerusalem Talmud, one sees three (dipping, matzah and roast).
Is this an instance of a disagreement between the text of the Mishnah preserved in Babylonia and the text of the Mishnah preserved in Palestine? There are such disagreements,[3] but this is not one of them. Here, the manuscript evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that the original text of the Mishnah recorded only the questions of dipping, matzah and roast.[4] Moreover, if one opens up a standard Masechet Pesachim of the Babylonian Talmud and looks at the text of the Mishnah recorded in the Rif and the Rosh, one sees that they too record a Mishnah which included only the questions of dipping, matzah and roast. Also, Rambam utilized a text of the Mishnah which included only these three questions.[5]
Let us see how the Encyclopaedia Judaica in its original and new editions deal with this issue. When Daniel Goldschmidt published his classic work on the Haggadah in 1960, after earlier German and Hebrew versions,[6] he clearly took the position that the original text of the Mishnah included only three questions.[7] It was therefore somewhat surprising when the "Mah Nishtannah" entry in the original Encyclopaedia Judaica (published in 1972 and written by the anonymous editors) stated that "[t]he Mishnah enumerates four questions." In its bibliography, this entry had cited only Goldschmidt's 1960 work, and one other less scholarly source.[8]
We are now in the 21st century. There is now a widespread consensus among scholars that the original text of the Mishnah included only three questions.[9] But when one looks at the new edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica, one finds only a reprint of the original entry![10]
2. A widely quoted explanation of the Vilna Gaon takes the positions that there were always four questions, and that, after the churban, the roast question was substituted by the reclining question.[11] We have already seen that the first of these positions is incorrect. The Haggadah fragments found in the Cairo Genizah show that the second of these positions is incorrect as well.
Genizah material generally dates from the 10th through the 13th centuries.[12] It is reasonable to assume that this is roughly the period of the Haggadah fragments from the Genizah.[13] Of course, not all of the Haggadah fragments from the Genizah span the mah nishtannah section. But of those that do, many include the roast question.[14] (The survival of the roast question for 1000 years, post-churban, has been implicitly acknowledged in the Haggadah shel Pesach, Torat Chayim, published by Mossad ha-Rav Kook, at p. 29, n. 59.) [15]
Furthermore, although most of the mah nishtannah Haggadah fragments found in the Genizah record four questions the way they are asked today,[16] we also find the following:[17]
-Several record three questions: matzah, dipping, and roast,[18] just like the original text of the Mishnah.
Most likely, the fragments with these three questions reflect the original Palestinian tradition of the Haggadah,[19] which followed the text of the Mishnah, and the fragments with four questions reflect the Babylonian tradition,[20] which gradually penetrated into Palestine and its surrounding areas.[21]
-One records the following three questions: dipping, matzah and reclining.[22]
-One records five questions: dipping, matzah, roast, maror, and reclining.[23] (See the photograph in M. Kasher, Haggadah Shelemah, p. 93.) In this fragment, the roast question is phrased:... צלי כולו המקדש בבית אוכלים היינו הזה והלילה. This is the only fragment in which the roast question is phrased with such a qualification. [24]
-Two record only the questions of dipping and roast.[25] (But there does not appear to be any reason why the matzah question would have been intentionally discontinued. Perhaps the matzah question was accidentally dropped by a scribe in one source, and further copies were later made from that source. It would have been easy for a scribe to accidentally turn his eye to the wrong mah nishtannah line in the source he was copying from, and thereby omit a question.)
- One records only the questions of dipping and matzah.
I would like to focus on this last source, which is not actually a Haggadah fragment, but is a section of an anonymous Geonic responsum which includes an outline of the procedures at the seder. It can be deduced that the responsum was composed in Babylonia because it includes avadim hayyinu, which was not a part of the Palestinian seder ritual in this period.[26] This responsum was published by Louis Ginzberg, in his Ginzey Schechter, vol. 2, pp. 258-260. [27]
Theoretically, it is possible to argue that the author of this responsum gave only an abbreviated version of the mah nishtannah, and listed only the first two questions, even though his practice was four. This seems to be the understanding of Ginzberg, who writes (p. 259, n. 1): הראשונות השאלות 'ב אלא כאן נאמרו ולא נתקצר נשתנה מה נוסח. B.M. Lewin included this responsum in his Otzar ha-Geonim, Pesachim (pp. 154-55), and he seems to agree with Ginzberg. (See p. 154, n. 13: נתקצר נשתנה מה נוסח.) But this interpretation seems very unlikely. The whole purpose of the responsum was to spell out the procedures and text of the seder. Abbrevation here would have defeated its purpose.
The Safrais take a different approach to this responsum in their monumental work, Haggadat Hazal. They write (p. 64, n. 53) that the third and fourth questions are העמוד בסוף חסרות, implying that these questions were originally included in this responsum but were cut off. Moreover, in their chart on p. 266, they put brackets over a supposed area of the third and fourth questions in this responsum, implying that these questions were once there. They take this approach so that the set of questions in our responsum could then parallel the set of questions found in the other known Babylonian Geonic sources of the Haggadah text: Seder R. Amram Gaon, Siddur R. Saadiah Gaon, and the Haggadah text published in 1984 by M. Lehman.[28] All these sources record the standard four questions: dipping, matzah, maror, and reclining.[29]
But I was able to view an image of the responsum (T-S Misc.36.179), and with the kind permission of the Cambridge University Library, have included this image at the end of this article. It is clear that the third and fourth questions were never there. The first side of the fragment ends with the last words of the matzah question (the last three words of this question were written below the last regular line), and the next side continues immediately with avadim hayyinu. It is clear from the image that there are no missing lines in between.
Assuming we reject the unlikely interpretation of Ginzberg, this source records a two-question set in Babylonia.[30] The idea that we have now been able to "excavate" such a set, evidence of a period before four questions became the universal practice there, is truly remarkable. An issue remains whether the responsum dates to the period before the maror and reclining questions were added in any Babylonian communities, or whether it dates to a period after they were added, but was composed in a community which did not add them. The latter seems more likely. (The responsum does have at least one other unique aspect.[31] It includes the statement: חורים בני היום[ו] עבדים היינו אתמול. The Safrais discuss this statement at p. 111 and do not mention any other fragments from the Genizah with this language.[32] On the image at the end of this article, this statement is found on the first page, six lines above the last full line.)
Regarding the issue of when the maror and reclining questions were added, the following are some reasonable observations that have been made by scholars to date:
◦ The reclining question was probably the last question to be added.[33] Unlike the maror question, it did not make its way into in any manuscripts of the Mishnah,[34] and in all communities, it is the last question of the set.[35]
◦ The maror question probably did not arise until after the text of the dipping question was changed in Babylonia (see Pes. 116a[36]) and the dipping question lost its connotation as a maror question. Once the dipping question lost this connotation, it was probably viewed as necessary to add a question relating to maror.[37]
◦ The reclining question probably originated in Babylonia as well.[38] It was probably added, after the maror question, due to a desire to fix the number of questions at four, parallel to the themes of four cups of wine and four sons.[39] Aside from Haggadah fragments found in the Genizah, the earliest sources which include the reclining question are: Seder R. Amram Gaon,[40] Siddur R. Saadiah Gaon,[41] and the Geonic Haggadah text published by Lehman in 1984. (With regard to Seder R. Amram Gaon, it is accepted that many additions and changes were made to it in the centuries after R. Amram's death, c. 875. The three surviving manuscripts of the work are only from the 14th-16th centuries. See D. Goldschmidt, Seder R. Amram Gaon, pp. 11-13. With regard to the Siddur R. Saadiah Gaon, the material in our possession has traditionally been viewed as representing a generally reliable version of the original 10th century work by R. Saadiah.[42] With regard to the Geonic Haggadah text published by Lehman, see above, n. 28.)
3. A main issue of debate among scholars has been whether the mah nishtannah set of the Mishnah reflects questions from Temple times. If we focus on the roast question ( הלילה הזה כולו צלי ), a reasonable initial assumption is that this question is referring to the pesach sacrifice, since the pesach sacrifice was something that was required to be roasted. This would suggest that this question, and hence perhaps all the questions, were composed during Temple times.
But many scholars argue that the roast question is not referring to the pesach sacrifice and that this question was composed after the churban (and hence, the other questions probably were as well.) They make the following arguments:
1. A practice arose after the churban, approved (or perhaps initiated) by Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, of eating a gedi mekulas as a method of commemorating the pesach sacrifice.[43] See Betzah 2:6-7 and Eduyyot 3:10-11. (Although these two sources do not specify that the Rabban Gamliel they are referring to is Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, it seems fairly clear, for a variety of reasons, that this is the case here.[44]) The meaning of the term mekulas is subject to debate.[45] Nevertheless, it is clear that the gedi mekulas was not designated as a pesach sacrifice, but was arranged on the spit during the roasting process in the same manner as a pesach sacrifice, and was roasted in its entirety just like a pesach sacrifice. See Tosef. Betzah 2:11 (איזהו גדי מקולס? כולו צלי ראשו וכרעיו וקרבו ) and Pes. 74a.[46] The Sages prohibited the gedi mekulas,[47] but it is possible that a large section of Jewry followed the leniency of Rabban Gamliel and engaged in this practice.[48] The roast question could have been composed post-churban in an area which followed this practice and could be referring to this practice.[49]
2. The Mishnah at Pesachim 4:4 records:
מקום שנהגו לאכול צלי בלילי פסחים, אוכלים; מקום שנהגו שלא לאכול, אינן אוכלין.
It is possible that this Mishnah was composed during Temple times and is referring to a practice of eating roast meat on the seder night outside the Temple. But just as likely, this Mishnah was composed after the churban and is referring to a post-churban practice of eating roast meat[50] as a commemoration of the pesach sacrifice. It is possible to understand the roast question in the Mishnah as composed, post-churban, in an area which followed this practice and as referring to this practice.[51]
But (as pointed out to me by my friend Sam Borodach) the precise phrasing of the roast question does not support either of these interpretations. When read in light of the parallel matzah question, the roast question implies that the question is about a required behavior of the evening. While there were areas which had a custom on this evening, post-churban, to eat a gedi mekulas or to eat roast meat, these were not required behaviors. It is hard to imagine the roast question phrased the way it was by someone composing it with the above optional commemorative behaviors in mind. The language of the roast question, read in light of the parallel matzah question, fits the pesach sacrifice best.[52]
Does it follow from this interpretation that the roast question was composed during Temple times? Not necessarily. Even if the roast question is referring to the pesach sacrifice, it very possibly could have been composed after the churban, as a simulation of a question that might have been asked during Temple times. Once the idea for a mah nishtannah question about matzah took hold, it would be have been natural and instructive to create a parallel question covering such an important commandment as the pesach sacrifice, even if the pesach sacrifice was no longer being offered. (All the more so if practices commemorating the pesach sacrifice were ongoing!)
(It is also possible to understand the roast question as having been composed post-churban if the pesach sacrifice itself continued after the churban.[53] But the evidence for this is weak.[54])
The Mishnah that concerns us, Pesachim 10:4, is found in the last chapter of this masechet. This suggests that this Mishnah was composed after the churban, since it is reasonable to presume that mishnayot that are presented in the early parts of a masechet were composed first and that mishnayot that are presented later were composed later.[55] Moreover, there is specific evidence suggesting that this particular chapter was composed after the churban. Mishnah 10:3 includes the statement:ובמקדש מביאין לפניו גופו של פסח. This statement suggests that the normative statements in this chapter describe only post-churban practice.[56] Of course, the questions themselves could still reflect questions from earlier times, which were recorded in a chapter composed after the churban.
Based on recent scholarly developments, a new argument can be made to support the idea that the questions were composed post-churban. The mah nishtannah is not included in the tenth chapter of the Tosefta. This chapter includes much material parallel to the tenth chapter of the Mishnah. In his Tosefta Atikta, published in 2002, Shamma Friedman studied the relationship between the Mishnah and Tosefta of Pesachim in the first four chapters and in the tenth chapter.[57] He came to the conclusion that the material in the Tosefta in these chapters seems to have originated earlier.[58] If Friedman is correct, this also tends to support a post-churban origin for the mah nishtannah.
So far, I have not discussed the precise role that the mah nishtannah serve in the Mishnah. But most likely, the mah nishtannah of the Mishnah was not a mandated piece of liturgy to be recited by the father or a typical son. Rather, it was what the child who lacks understanding is taught to ask (…מה נשתנה אביו מלמדו, אם אין דעת בבן).[59] This also perhaps implies that the mah nishtannah text was a later development.
Note finally that the Talmud, at Pes. 70a, records and accepts a statement by R. Hisda that the roast question was authored by Ben Tema. Ben Tema took the position that the chagigah too had to be roasted. In the view of R. Hisda, the language of the roast question, הלילה הזה כולו צלי, fit the position of Ben Tema only. Ben Tema is only mentioned at Pes. 70a and Yoma 83a and there is not enough information to determine if he lived during Temple times. (Some suggest that he is to be identified with R. Judah Ben Tema, who probably dates to the second century C.E,[60] but this identification is only conjecture.)
The above statement of R. Hisda is not recorded again at Pes. 116a, where one would expect it.[61] R. Hisda's statement is also surprising, because it takes an overly literal approach to the roast question. There is also no statement in the Jerusalem Talmud expressing the view that the roast question was authored by Ben Tema.[62]
To summarize, it is possible that the mah nishtannah was composed during Temple times, but it also possible that it was composed post-churban. In support of the latter is that the mah nishtannah is found in the last chapter of the masechet, and in a chapter whose normative language suggests that it was composed post-churban. The inclusion of a question about roast meat is not inconsistent with this approach. This question could have been composed post-churban in an area which followed the post-churban practice of preparing a gedi mekulas or in an area which followed the post-churban practice of eating roast meat. More likely, if the question was composed post-churban, it is referring to the pesach sacrifice and was composed for educational purposes, as a simulation of a question that might have been asked during Temple times. The fact that the mah nishtannah is not included in the Tosefta may also support a post-churban origin for it.
Cambridge University Library T-S Misc.36.179
(reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library)
[1] I would like to acknowledge Dr. Jay Rovner, Rabbi Mordy Friedman, and Sam Borodach for their thoughts and assistance. The views expressed are solely my own.
Several sources will be cited throughout:
-D. Goldschmidt, Haggadah shel Pesach (1960), cited as "Goldschmidt."
-M. Kasher, Haggadah Shelemah (third ed., 1967), cited as "Kasher."
-Y. Tabory, Pesach Dorot (1996), cited as "Tabory."
-S. and Z. Safrai, Haggadat Chazal (1998), cited as "Safrai."
-S. Friedman, Tosefta Atikta: Masechet Pesach Rishon (2002), cited as "Friedman."
-R. Steiner, "On the Original Structure and Meaning of Mah Nishtannah and the History of Its Reinterpretation," JSIJ 7 (2008), pp. 1-41, cited as "Steiner."
[2] I will call them questions, even though some have argued that they are best understood, in the context of Mishnah 10:4, as explanations or exclamations. See, e.g., Safrai, pp. 31 and 206, and the sources cited by Steiner, pp. 21-22.
Steiner strongly defends the traditional understanding of the mah nishtannah as questions (actually, as one long question). He points out that the Talmud (Pes. 116a) includes the following passage:
ת"ר חכם בנו שואלו ואם אינו חכם אשתו שואלתו ואם לאו הוא שואל לעצמו ואפילו שני תלמידי חכמים שיודעין בהלכות הפסח שואלין זה לזה מה נשתנה הלילה הזה מכל הלילות שבכל הלילות אנו מטבילין פעם אחת הלילה הזה שתי פעמים:
(Although the printed editions have punctuation between שואלין זה לזה and מה נשתנה, this punctuation is only a later addition. See Steiner, p. 26, n. 95, and Kasher, p. 35. But see Goldschmidt, p. 11, and Safrai, p. 112, for a different approach to the above text.)
Steiner argues that the Mishnah is most properly understood as intending only one (long) question, i.e., "what special characteristic of this night is causing us to depart from our normal routine in so many ways?" He shows that R. Saadiah Gaon and every early medieval source understood the mah nishtannah as only one long question. It was not until the 13th century that a medieval source first referred to them asשאלות (plural).
A study of the the mah nishtannah inevitably raises other issues. Is the mah nishtannah to be recited by the child only if he cannot formulate his own questions? Is it perhaps to be recited by the father? On these issues, see, e.g., Goldschmidt, pp. 10-11, Kasher, pp. רד-רב, Safrai, p. 31, ArtScroll Mishnah Series, comm. to Pes. 10:4, p. 210, and J. Kulp and D. Golinkin, The Schechter Haggadah: Art, History, and Commentary, p. 196.
Most likely, the correct understanding of Mishnah 10:4 is that the mah nishtannah is what the child who lacks understanding is taught to ask. See Steiner, pp. 26, and 33-36. (Steiner suggests that we should read the beginning of Mishnah 10:4 elliptically as if it includes the words לשאל after בבן דעת אין, and again after אביו מלמדו.)
It was only sometime in the post-Talmudic period that the mah nishtannah began to be treated as a mandated piece of liturgy.
[3] A well-known example is the first Mishnah in the fourth chapter of Bava Metzia. On this topic generally, see M. Schacter, "Babylonian-Palestinian Variations in the Mishnah," JQR 42 (1951-52), pp. 1-35.
[4] This is what the earliest and most reliable Mishnah manuscripts record. See Safrai, p. 26 and Tabory, pp. 260, 262, and 361.With regard to the order of these three questions, almost all of the early sources which record the mah nishtannah as dipping, matzah and roast, record them in that precise order. See Tabory, p. 262.
Kasher, p. 113, n. 6, refers to eight manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud to Pesachim which include the Mishnah. All but one include only the above three questions in their text of the Mishnah (in the order dipping, matzah, and roast). (In this note, Kasher did not cite the Munich 95 manuscript of the Talmud, which also includes only these three questions, because it includes them in a different order.)
Almost certainly, it was the familiarity of later copyists with the maror question from the texts of their Haggadah that led them to insert it into texts of the Mishnah. See H. Guggenheimer, The Scholar's Haggadah, p. 250.
Now that it has been established that Mishnah 10:4 includes only three questions, many scholars claim that the three explanations of R. Gamliel at Mishnah 10:5 (pesach, matzah, maror) are the answers to the mah nishtannah. But this approach must be rejected. As Steiner explains (pp. 32-33), although the topics of the mah nishtannah match the topics of the three explanations (the dipping question was the maror question of the time), the "explanations" given do not specifically answer the questions posed. Moreover, the mah nishtannah is most properly understood as only one long question, i.e., "what special characteristic of this night is causing us to depart from our normal routine in so many ways?" If so, what we should be looking for in an answer is one fundamental answer and not three piecemeal ones. According to Steiner, כל הפרשה … מתחיל בגנות is the answer expressed in the Mishnah to the mah nishtannah. (The prevalent view among the Rishonim was that avadim hayyinu was the answer to the mah nishtannah. See Steiner, p. 31. But avadim hayyinu is not found in the Mishnah, and was not even included in the Palestinian seder ritual. See Steiner, p. 32 and below, n. 26.)
[5] See the edition of the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah published by Y. Kafah. Rambam copied a text of the Mishnah (presumably one that he felt was authoritative) and wrote his commentary on that text. For most of the sedarim of the Mishnah (including Pesachim), we have this text of the Mishnah and the Rambam's commentary, all written in the Rambam's own hand. This text of the Mishnah with the Rambam's commentary was published by Kafah. The edition of the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah included in a standard Talmud volume does not include a text of the Mishnah.
[6] The German version was published in 1936. The earlier Hebrew version was published in 1947.
[7] Goldschmidt, pp. 11-12. He also clearly took this position in the 1947 version (pp. 9-10, and p. 29). I have not seen the 1936 version.
[8] The other source cited was: "J. Levy, A Guide to Passover (1958)." There is a typographical error here, as the author's name was Isaac Levy. This was not a work which compared in any way with the level of scholarship reflected in Goldschmidt's 1960 Haggadah. At p. 27, Levy assumed, without any discussion, that the Mishnah enumerated the matzah, maror, roast, and dipping questions.
[9] E.g., Safrai, p. 26, Tabory, pp. 260, 262 and 361, Steiner, p. 32, and Kulp and Golinkin, pp. 198-99.
[10] It includes no new bibliographical references either, unlike many of the other entries.
[11] The Gaon's explanation is printed at Kasher, at p. 115. According to this explanation, reclining at the seder would not have been a shinui prior to the churban, since it was the practice to eat while reclining all year round. Only after the Temple was destroyed did reclining at the seder become something unusual. At the same time, the pesach sacrifice ceased. The Gaon's explanations to the Haggadah were first published in 1805 (a few years after his death) by his student R. Menachem Mendel of Shklov.
The Encylopaedia Judaica entry "Mah Nishtannah" also essentially follows the approach of the Gaon.
Another widely quoted view is that of the Rambam, who writes that there were originally five questions before the question about roast meat was dropped. The Rambam writes (Hilchot Chametz u-Matzah 8:3):
בזמן הזה אינו אומר והלילה הזה כולו צלי שאין לנו קרבן.
[12] R. Brody, The Geonim of Babylonia and the Shaping of Medieval Jewish Culture, p. 32.
[13] For a listing of the Haggadah fragments from the Genizah, see Safrai, pp. 293-301. Most of these have not been published.
[14] For some published examples, see: 1) I. Abrahams, "Some Egyptian Fragments of the Passover Haggadah," J.Q.R. (O.S.) 10 (1898), pp. 41-51, fragments # 2, 7,8 and 10; 2) the Haggadah manuscript first described briefly in an article by J.H. Greenstone in 1911, and later published in full by Goldschmidt; 3) the Haggadah manuscript published by Jay Rovner, "An Early Passover Haggadah According to the Palestinian Rite," J.Q.R. 90 (2000), pp. 337-396, and 4) MS Cambridge T-S H2.152 (photograph at Kasher, p. 93). There are other such fragments as well. For example, see Safrai, p. 53, n. 21 and p. 114, nn. 9 and 11. (The manuscript published by Rovner is probably, but not certainly, from the Genizah.). In only one of these texts (T-S H2.152) was the text of the question amended to צלי כולו המקדש בבית אוכלים היינו.
With one exception (see below), the roast question is found only among sets of mah nishtannah which are based on the three questions included in the Mishnah. These sets either follow the set of three included in the Mishnah, or have a modified version of the set which leaves out the matzah question (perhaps erroneously, see the discussion in the text). (But not all of the fragments which include the roast question include a complete set of questions, so the above conclusions are not absolute.)
The exception is T-S H2.152 which includes the roast question along with four other questions.
One text from the Genizah (Abrahams, fragment #5) includes the following blessing immediately after ha-motzi:
מרורים מצות לאכל אבותינו את צוה אשר העולם מלך … 'ה 'א 'ב
הברית זוכר 'ה 'א 'ב גבורותיו את להזכיר אש צלי בשר
(The Safrais quote this text at p. 30, but erroneously leave out the words אבותינו את.) Whatever community was using this text was almost certainly eating roast meat at their meal, although Tabory (p. 103) raises the possibility that they may have only been partaking a small, symbolic amount.
A similar blessing is found in a different Genizah fragment printed by the Safrais at p. 289. There, however, the blessing is included before the blessing for washing and ha-motzi, so it is less clear that the blessing was meant to precede the actual eating of roast meat.
Regarding the concluding blessing הברית זוכר, there are other fragments from the Genizah which include such a blessing in this section of the Haggadah (without reference to אש צלי בשר ). See, e.g, the Greenstone-Goldschmidt manuscript (Goldschmidt, p. 83), and Abrahams, fragment #7. For further discussion of this concluding blessing, see Goldschmidt, p. 60, n. 10.
[16] Safrai, p. 113. (I am not concerned with variation in the order of these four questions.)
[17] In this section, I am only including fragments whose total number of questions in their mah nishtannah set can be determined. Therefore, I am not including fragments such as Abrahams #7 and Abrahams #8, which include mah nishtannah questions but which are cut off mid-set. For example, Abrahams fragment #7 starts with the roast question, but is cut off before it. Abrahams fragment #8 starts in the middle of the matzah question.
[18] See, e.g., Abrahams, fragments #2 and #10. See also our discussion below of the Greenstone-Goldschmidt fragment. Safrai writes (p. 65) that ניכר מספר of the Haggadah fragments from the Genizah are of this type.
[19] Safrai, pp. 26, 64 and 113.
But a few fragments which include the roast question follow the Babylonian rite in other essential respects. See Safrai, p. 30, n. 55, and p. 114, n. 9.
[20] Safrai, pp. 113 and 206.
[21] We know from many other contexts that Babylonian customs gradually penetrated into Palestine and its surrounding areas and became the majority custom. See, e.g., Brody, The Geonim of Babylonia and the Shaping of Medieval Jewish Culture, pp. 111, 115, and 117. (An example is the practice of reciting kedushah in the daily amidah. The letter of Pirkoi ben Baboi, early 9th cent., describes how Babylonian Jews moved to Palestine and forced Palestinian Jews to adopt the Babylonian practice of reciting kedushah daily.) See also I. Ta-Shema, Ha-Tefillah ha-Ashkenazit ha-Kedumah, p. 7.
[22] See Kasher, p. 113, n. 11. Kasher calls this manuscript "21ק." It is MS Cambridge T-S H2.145. It is possible that this is not a legitimate variant and that the maror question was omitted in error by the scribe who copied this fragment. As explained in the text, the reclining question was almost certainly the last question added and there was little reason for a community to have dropped the maror question.
We also have evidence of a mah nishtannah set of dipping, matzah, and maror. This does not come from the Genizah, but from additions inscribed at the end of a certain siddur. The siddur was authored by a rabbinic authority from Morocco, who lived in the 11th or 12th century. The additions, inscribed by the owner of the siddur, describe various local rites, and include a mah nishtannah set of dipping, matzah and maror. See Rovner, p. 351, n. 57.
[24] Safrai, p. 53. This set is so aberrant that it may not reflect an actual rite. Possibly, the set was created by a lone scribe who combined the various questions that he knew of into one set. Since this set records the language of the roast question in a manner found nowhere else, this is evidence that the scribe who copied this fragment may have been a creative one.
[25] The Haggadah manuscript published by Rovner clearly records only these two questions. The Greenstone-Goldschmidt manuscript initially recorded only these two questions, but a later scribe inserted the matzah question. See the last line of fragment א/ד and the first line of fragment ב/ד, in the photos at Goldschmidt, p. ii. These photos show that these lines are in a different handwriting. (The Safrais also print a text of the Goldstone-Goldschmidt manuscript. But they print it as if it included all three questions initially. See Safrai, pp. 286-89.)
[26] Safrai, p. 50. See also the responsum of R. Natronai Gaon quoted, for example, at Kasher, pp. 27-28, Goldschmidt, p. 73, and Safrai, pp. 56-57. (In this responsum, R. Natronai criticizes an alternative Haggadah ritual for many reasons, one of which was the ritual's omission of avadim hayyinu. R. Natronai thought it was a sectarian Haggadah ritual. It turns out that he was criticizing the Palestinian Haggadah ritual. See Goldschmidt, p. 74, Safrai, pp. 56-59, and Brody, p. 96.)
[27] It is cited in Kasher, p. 113, n. 11 with the symbol ש.
The responsum is not devoted solely to the seder. The first few lines of the responsum, whose beginning is cut off, deal with the hoshanot of Sukkot.
[28] M. Lehman, Seder ve-Haggadah Shel Pesach le-Rav Natronai Gaon Al Pi Ketav-Yad Kadmon, in Sefer Yovel li-Chevod Morenu ha-Gaon Rabi Yosef Dov ha-Levi Soloveitchik Shelita, ed. S. Israeli, vol. 2, pp. 976-993, at p. 986. The title of Lehman's article is unfortunate. The text of the article does not even claim that the Geonic Haggadah text published there served as the Haggadah of R. Natronai Gaon. Lehman composed the article initially based on a manuscript which spanned three sections, one of which was a Haggadah text. The first section of the manuscript included a caption stating that the material in that section (a long paytanic version of kiddush for Passover, and a long paytanic version of the blessing before drinking the second cup) was enacted and arranged by R. Natronai. The Haggadah section had its own caption which stated that what followed was the text of the Haggadah accepted by the Talmud and the Geonim (with no mention of R. Natronai). Three Passover-related responsa followed, without any caption. Later, Lehman acquired another page from the same manuscript. He writes that the body of his article was already in final form by this time, but he was able to add his discussion of the new page at the end of the article. The new page included three anonymous responsa, one of which is recorded elsewhere in the name of R. Hai Gaon. This made Lehman realize (p. 991) that his pages were part of a collection of material from various Geonim, and not material that may all have had some connection to R. Natronai. Probably, the article was given its title (by Lehman or perhaps by someone else) before Lehman acquired the additional page. But even before Lehman acquired the additional page, the title was unjustified, as the Haggadah section had its own caption which did not connect it to R. Natronai. (Despite its caption, even the material in the first section of the manuscript may not have been composed by R. Natronai.)
It is unfortunate that the Safrais refer to Lehman's text throughout their work as the "Haggadah of R. Natronai Gaon." It is evident fom their discussion of this text (p. 261) that all they were really willing to accept is that the text reflected a Haggadah from the time of the Geonim in general.
[29] See Safrai, pp. 261 and 266.
[30] See Kasher, p. 42, J. Rovner, "An Early Passover Haggadah: Corrigenda," JQR 91 (2001), p. 429 (correcting p. 351, n. 59 in his original article), and J. Kulp and D. Golinkin, The Schechter Haggadah: Art, History, and Commentary, p. 199.
Note that the Rif quotes a text of M. Pesachim 10:4 which includes only the questions of dipping, matzah and roast, and then remarks פסחא לן דלית צלי בשר לימא לא והשתא. It can be argued based on this that, in his community, the mah nishtannah at the seder may have only included dipping and matzah.
[31] Perhaps close examination of the responsum will reveal other unique aspects. The responsum follows an alternative nusach for kiddush, but this nusach is widely attested to. See, e.g., Siddur R. Saadiah Gaon, pp. 141-142, Kasher, pp. 183-85 and ג-ב, Safrai, p. 61, and Lehman, pp. 977-980 and 982-83. The responsum records the Sages in Bnei Brak as having been מסיחין about yitziat mitzrayim all night. But there is other evidence for this reading or its equivalent: משיחין. See Safrai, p. 208.
[32] But this language is recorded in the haggadot of Djerba (which also include the standard language that we are now slaves and will be free next year). See Kasher, p. 201, and Safrai, p. 111, n. 6. (Djerba is an island off the coast of Tunisia. The Jewish community there has ancient roots. )
R. Shlomo Goren saw fit to to include the above Geonic language (along with the standard language) in the haggadah he composed for the use of the Israeli army. See, e.g., Kasher, p. 201, citing the 1956 edition of the Haggadah Shel Pesach published by הראשית הצבאית הרבנות. Many editions of this haggadah were published and I saw this language in later editions as well.
Kasher discusses the Geonic language at pp. 198-201 and attempts to provide a rationale for it.
[33] Tabory, p. 260.
[34] The maror question made its way into some, but not the earliest, texts of the Mishnah. See Tabory, p. 261.
[35] Tabori, p. 261, n. 36.
[36] In Amoraic Babylonia, there was no practice of dipping throughout the year. This led the Babylonian Amoraim to rephrase the question. Based on the statements by the Babylonian Amoraim expressed at Pes. 116a, the text of the dipping question was changed in many Mishnah manuscripts. Various forms of the question developed. See Safrai, p. 27, and Goldschmidt, p. 77.
[37] Tabory, pp. 261-262. Almost certainly, the original formulation of this question described the herb as מרורים. See Siddur R. Saadiah Gaon, p. 137, Goldschmidt, p. 12, Kasher, pp. 113-14 and pp. יא-י (variant readings), and Tabory, p. 261. See also Rambam, Hilchot Chametz u-Matzah 8:2. (In the nusach ha-haggadah included in the standard printed Mishnah Torah, the reading is מרור. But the Frankel edition points out that some versions read מרורים here.) מרורים is the phrase used in the Bible (Ex. 12:8 and Num. 9:11). Moreover, the singular מרור refers to only one of the five herbs with which one can fulfill one's obligation. See M. Pes. 2:6.
[38] In suggesting that both the maror and reclining questions arose in Babylonia, I am following the approach of the Safrais. The Safrais believe that even though the majority of the mah nishtannah Haggadah fragments from the Genizah include dipping, matzah, maror and reclining, these fragments do not reflect the original Palestinian custom. These fragments only show that the Babylonian custom became the majority custom in Palestine and its surrounding areas.
[39] Guggenheimer, p. 250.
[40] P. 113 (ed. Goldschmidt).
[42] But N. Cohen has noted several contradictions between the instructions provided by R. Saadiah and the liturgical texts, and between parallel prayer texts in different sections. According to Cohen, some of the liturgical texts included in the Siddur may have been supplied by later copyists, or at least changed by them. See Cohen, le-Ofiyyo ha-Mekori shel Siddur Rav Saadiah Gaon, Sinai 95 (1983/84), pp. 249-67. Cohen does not address the mah nishtannah in her study.
[43] A gedi (=young goat) was one of the animals permitted for the pesach sacrifice. Ex. 12:5 states that the pesach sacrifice must come מן הכבשים ומן העזים (=from a lamb or a goat).
[44] One such reason is that plain references to Rabban Gamliel (i.e., without the description "ha-Zaken") are almost always references to Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh. See Safrai, p. 28, n. 50, E. Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, ed. Vermes, Millar and Black, vol. 2, p. 368, n. 48, and Tos. Niddah 6b, s.v. בשפחתו.
A story referring to a practice of preparing a gedi mekulas among Roman Jewry, and the objection of the Sages of Palestine, is found in many sources. See, e.g., Pes. 53a:
תודוס איש רומי הנהיג את בני רומי לאכול גדיים מקולסין בלילי פסחים שלחו לו אלמלא תודוס אתה גזרנו עליך נדוי שאתה מאכיל את ישראל קדשים בחוץ ...
See also Ber. 19a, Bezah 23a, and in the Jerusalem Talmud: Pes. 7:1, Bezah 2:7, and Mo'ed Katan 3:1. Most scholars believe that Todos lived after the churban. See Tabory, p. 98. But there are some scholars who believe that Todos lived during Temple times. See Safrai, p. 28, n. 52. Even if it can shown that there was a practice outside of Palestine of preparing a gedi mekulas during Temple times, this does not mean that there was such a practice in Palestine, where going to Jerusalem and participating in an actual pesach sacrifice was largely possible. (The version of the above story in the standard printed edition of the Talmud at Ber. 19a states that the message to Todos was sent by Simeon b. Shetach. But this is an erroneous reading. See Tabory, p. 98.)
Aside from being recorded in both Talmuds, the above story is also recorded in the Tosefta (Bezah 2:11). But the Tosefta has a slightly different reading:
תודוס איש רומי הנהיג את בני רומי ליקח טלאים בלילי פסחים ועושין אותן מקולסין...
טלא is the Aramaic term for שה, a broader term than גדי . Regarding the significance of this reading, see S. Lieberman, Tosefta ki-Feshutah, 5, p. 959.
[45] See the following note.
[46] Tosef. Betzah 2:11:
איזהו גדי מקולס? כולו צלי, ראשו וכרעיו וקרבו. בישל ממנו כל שהוא שלק ממנו כל שהוא אין זה גדי מקולס ...
Pes. 74a:
איזהו גדי מקולס דאסור לאכול בלילי פסח בזמן הזה כל שצלאו כולו כאחד
.נחתך ממנו אבר נשלק ממנו אבר אין זה גדי מקולס
(Perhaps it was only the preparation of a gedi mekulas that was forbidden by the Sages, or perhaps the preparation of any kind of מקולס שה was forbidden as well. See the version of the story involving Todos recorded in Tosef. Betzah 2:11 and Lieberman, Tosefta ki-Feshutah, 5, p. 959.)
There was a dispute as to the proper manner of positioning the legs and entrails of the pesach sacrifice while it was being roasted. See M. Pesachim 7:1. The view of R. Akiva was that they are hung outside it. This perhaps sheds light on the meaning of the difficult term mekulas. Mekulas in Aramaic can be interpreted as wearing a helmet (see the similar word at Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to I Sam. 17:5). According to Rashi, comm. to Pes. 74a, when R. Akiva expressed the view that the legs and entrails were roasted outside the animal, he meant that they were placed above its head. This made the goat look like it was wearing a helmet. Mekulas would therefore be another way of describing the method of positioning according to R. Akiva. (Rashi elsewhere give a slightly different interpretation of how the term mekulas accords with the view of R. Akiva. See Rashi, comm. to Pes. 53a and Betzah 22b.) An alternative approach is to understand mekulas as meaning "beautiful" or "praised." See, e.g., Rambam, comm. to Mishnah, Betzah, 2nd chap. The root קלס often has the meaning "to beautify" or "to praise" in rabbinic literature, derived from the Greek word καλος (beautiful). See also J. Gereboff, Rabbi Tarfon: The Tradition, the Man, and Early Rabbinic Judaism, p. 70, where two other Greek derivations for mekulas are suggested: καλως, an animal led on a string, and κολος, a hornless animal. Gereboff also cites S. Krauss for the view that χαυλος in Greek means "helmeted." See also Tabory, p. 97, n. 248.
[47] No reason is given in the Mishnah for the Sages' prohibition. But in the response to Todos, a reason is given. If the practice of preparing a gedi mekulas is permitted, people will think that kodshim can be eaten outside of the azarah, because the practice was to refer to the gedi mekulas as if it were a pesach offering. Probably, Palestinian Jewry as well as Roman Jewry referred to the gedi mekulas as if it were a pesach offering. See below, n. 54.
[48] There would be evidence of this if the custom referred to at M. Pesachim 4:4 is the custom to prepare and eat a gedi mekulas.
[49] The Safrais (p. 28), for example, take this approach, as does Friedman (p. 92).
[50] Some scholars argue that the custom being referred to in this Mishnah is simply the custom to prepare and eat a gedi mekulas. See, e.g., Safrai, pp. 27-28. But this is not the plain sense of the Mishnah.
[51] Scholars who take this approach include G. Allon, The Jews in their Land in the Talmudic Age, pp. 264-65, and Goldschmidt, p. 12. In this approach, the roast question arose in connection with what was perhaps the practice of a large section of Jewry. By contrast, the custom to prepare a gedi mekulas may not have been a widespread custom.
[52] A response to this would be that the roast question was phrased the way it was so it could be parallel to the matzah question, even though the phrasing did not exactly fit the concept of an optional commemorative practice.
[53] There are those who suggest that the pesach sacrifice (and other sacrifices as well) continued after the churban (perhaps outside the makom ha-mikdash and without the permission of the Sages). See, e.g., J. Brand, "Korban Pesach le-Achar Churban Bayit Sheni," Ha-Hed 12/6 (1937) and 13/7 (1938), and the references at D. Bleich, Contemporary Halakhic Problems, vol. 1, pp. 247-48. See also Tabory, Moadey Yisrael be-Tekufat ha-Mishnah ve-ha-Talmud, p. 99, n. 65.
[54] For example, M. Pesachim 7:2 records a story in which Rabban Gamliel told his slave Tavi to go out and roast "the pesach" on the roasting tray. (The Rabban Gamliel who had a slave named Tavi was Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh. See Safrai, p. 28.) But this story can easily be interpreted as involving only the preparation of a gedi mekulas, post-churban, with the term "pesach" being used only loosely. For similar probable loose usages of the term "pesach," see Tosef. Ohalot 3:9 and 18:18, and J. Talmud Meg. 1:11. See also Tabory, p. 100-101.
The argument that the pesach sacrifice continued after the churban has also been made based on a passage in Josephus' Antiquities. Josephus writes (II, 313): "to this day we keep this sacrifice in the same customary manner, calling the feast Pascha…" Josephus tells us (XX, 267) that he completed this work in the 13th year of the reign of Domitian (= 93-94 C.E). (The precise year that book II was written is unknown.) But Josephus was writing in Rome, not Palestine, and almost certainly all he meant is that the pesach sacrifice has been kept throughout the centuries through approximately his time. See also B. Bokser, The Origins of the Seder, p. 106.
The historian Procopius, describing events in Palestine in the 6th century, wrote:
[W]henever in their calendar Passover came before the
Christian Easter, [Justinian] forbade the Jews to celebrate it
on their proper day, to make then any sacrifices to God or perform
any of their customs. Many of them were heavily fined by the
magistrates for eating lamb at such times…
In the late 4th or early 5th century, the church father Jerome wrote:
Take any Jew you please who has been converted to Christianity,
and you will see that he practices the rite of circumcision on his
newborn son, keeps the Sabbath, abstains from forbidden food,
and brings a lamb as an offering on the 14th of Nissan.
See Secret History of Procopius, ed. R. Atwater, pp. 260-261 and S. Krauss, "The Jews in the Works of the Church Fathers," JQR (OS) 6 (1893/1894), p. 237. But almost certainly, these passages are only referring to the practice of slaughtering a gedi mekulas. See Safrai, p. 30, n. 55. (Obviously, the references to "sacrifices" and "offering" in the above passages are only translations.)
See T. Rabinovitz, "Sefer ha-Maasim le-Vnei Eretz Yisrael:Seridim Hadashim," Tarbitz 41 (1972), p. 284.
Sefer ha-Maasim is a work whose purpose seems to have been to record decisions of halachah applicable in its time. Safrai p. 30, and Rabinovitz, p. 280.
[55] Actually, the matter of the order of the chapters in Mishnah Pesachim is not so simple. Some manuscripts of the Talmud and commentaries by Rishonim follow an arrangement in which the tenth chapter follows the first four chapters. All these chapters together are called Masechet Pesach Rishon and the other chapters are called Masechet Pesach Sheni. R. Menachem Meiri writes that this alternative arrangement dates from the time of the Geonim or later. See Safrai, p. 19, n. 1. But some scholars, such as Shamma Friedman, believe that this alternative arrangement has a more ancient origin. See Friedman, p. 12, n. 5. If this alternative arrangement was the original arrangement, it is a mistake to view the tenth chapter as if it were the last of ten chapters.
[56] Also, the names of the Sages included in the tenth chapter are: R. Tarfon, R. Akiva, R. Yose, R. Yishmael, Rabban Gamliel, and R. Eliezer b. R. Tzadok. (References to "Rabban Gamliel" in the Mishnah, without the description "ha-Zaken," are almost always references to Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh. As to R. Eliezer b. R. Tzadok, he was active both before and after the churban.) M. Pesachim 10:6 records that R. Akiva included a prayer for the rebuilding of Jerusalem at his seder.
The introductory statement ערבי פסחים סמוך למנחה לא יאכל אדם עד שתחשך and the detailed instructions governing the drinking of wine also give the impression of a chapter composed after the churban, detailing how an individual was obligated to conduct himself in his home. See Friedman, p. 409.
Two arguments between Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai are also included in this chapter. In general, these reflect arguments from Temple times. But the author or editor of chapter 10 could simply have inserted this earlier material into a chapter composed after the churban. See Safrai, p. 19.
Many printed editions of Mishnah 10:3 read: ובמקדש היו מביאין לפניו גופו של פסח. But היו is a later addition. (See Safrai, p. 25 and Friedman, pp. 89 and 430.) Some have argued that the absence of היו provides a basis for dating this section of the Mishnah, and by implication, the rest of the chapter, to Temple times. In this interpretation, the Mishnah first states the practice in the גבולין in its time (…הביאו לפניו), and then continues with the practice in theמקדש in its time (…ובמקדש מביאין). But as Safrai (p. 25) and Friedman (pp. 89, 430-32 and 438) point out, such an interpretation is very unlikely, and the addition of היו does not change the meaning of the phrase but correctly clarifies the original meaning.
The debate about whether the tenth chapter was composed before or after the churban is summarized nicely by Friedman (see, e.g., pp. 88-92, 430-432, and 437-38). Friedman strongly advocates the position that the chapter was composed after the churban.
[57] With regard to why these particular chapters were chosen, see above, n. 55.
[58] The precise relationship between the Mishnah and the Tosefta has always been an issue. See, e.g., the entry "Tosefta" in the original Encyclopaedia Judaica and the revised entry in the new edition.
[59] Steiner, pp. 26, and 33-36. Steiner suggests that we should read this statement elliptically as if it includes the words לשאל after בבן דעת אין, and again after מלמדו אביו.
[60] See EJ 10:354 and S. Friedman, le-Ofiyyan shel ha-Beraitot be-Talmud ha-Bavli: Ben Tema u-Ben Dortai, in Netiot le-David: Sefer ha-Yovel le-David Halivni, pp. 248-255.
[61] But see Tos., s.v. כולו.
[62] Many authorities seem to disregard the statement of R. Hisda. For example, the Rif writes that the chagigah is to be commemorated at the seder by an item that is mevushal. Yet he implies in a different passage that the roast question was a normative question during Temple times. Similarly, the Rambam does not follow the position of Ben Tema (see Hilchot Karban Pesach 10:13), but at the same time, he includes the roast question in his list of mah nishtannah from Temple times. See Hilchot Chametz u-Matzah 8:2 (and Lechem Mishneh there). Note that R. Joseph Caro, OH 473, takes the position that the egg that commemorates the chagigah should be מבושלת. Compare Tos. Pes. 114b, s.v. שני (the halachah follows Ben Tema), and R. Moses Isserles, OH 473 (the egg that commemorates the chagigah must be roasted).
Friedman, in his Tosefta Atikta: Masechet Pesach Rishon (2002), pp. 91-92, accepts the essence of the interpretation of R. Hisda, but believes that the roast question must have been composed in accordance with a majority view. This leads him to conclude that the roast question must have been composed after the churban. (In Temple times, a chagigah offering was brought, and according to the majority view, it was not roasted. Since the roast question includes the phrase הלילה הזה כולו צלי, it could not have been composed in accordance with the majority view in Temple times.) In a later article, le-Ofiyyan shel ha-Beraitot be-Talmud ha-Bavli: Ben Tema u-Ben Dortai, pp. 195-274, in Netiot le-David: Sefer ha-Yovel le-David Halivni (2004), Friedman discusses the Ben Tema passage extensively, and takes a different approach.


text:
|Los Angeles, Calif.
|High School:
|Venice High School
Zak was a four-time letterman while swimming at Venice High School. Murez, who is now a sophomore swimmer for the Bulldogs, set eight new school records and served as the captain of his high school squad. Here at Yale, Zak has mainly focused on swimming the breaststroke events, but has also spent time swimming in the 200-yard medley relay and 400-yard freestyle relay. In his freshman season, Murez's top finishes came in a dual-meet against Fairfield and Southern Connecticut State. Murez finished third in both the 100- and 200-yard breaststroke events. So far in his sophomore season, Murez has continued to swim strongly. His best performances were a sixth-place finish in the 100-breaststroke against Columbia, an event he also placed sixth in at the Dartmouth-Penn dual meet. His highest overall finish this year came as part of the 200-yard freestyle relay at the BU Terrier Invitational, where he placed fourth. He also made the B Finals and placed 13th in the 200-yard individual medley at that event. Murez also had fourth-place finishes against Dartmouth this year in the 200-yard medley relay and the 400-yard freestyle relay.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You are hereHome ›
Narrow Search
Now showing results 1-3 of 3
Remote sensing, using Thermal Infrared Multispectral Scanner (TIMS) data, has lead to the discovery of previously unknown roads in the canyon area of New Mexico once occupied by the Anasazi culture. Students will use those images, along with maps... (View More) and photos, to observe the roads and surrounding area. Students will then compare the value of each media (image, map, photo) in uncovering and interpreting archeological information. Emphasis is placed on the map/image reading skills of direction and scale. The URL opens to the investigation directory, with links to teacher and student materials, lesson extensions, resources, teaching tips, and assessment strategies. This is Investigation 1 of three found in the Grades 5-8 Module 4 of Mission Geography. The Mission Geography curriculum integrates data and images from NASA missions with the National Geography Standards. Each of the three investigations in Module 4, while related, can be done independently. (View Less)
Materials Cost: 1 cent - $1 per group of students
This is a lesson about the effects of large impacts. Learners will use critical thinking skills to evaluate and apply data from a narrative to a scientific selection process, will demonstrate or visualize simulations of some of the effects of a huge... (View More) impact, and will write a point of view narrative. Materials and vocabulary lists, and advanced preparation and procedural tips are included. This is lesson 14 of 19 in Exploring Meteorite Mysteries. (View Less)
Materials Cost: Free
This is a lesson about locating impact craters on Earth using longitude, latitude, and maps. Learners will observe impact craters on Earth and other solar system bodies, discuss geologic forces that have erased much of the evidence of past impacts,... (View More) locate existing and potential impact sites, and plan the necessary research (including a field work plan and request for funding) to investigate and verify their observations. Activities, a locator map, vocabulary words, and experimental extensions are included. This is lesson 7 of 19 in Exploring Meteorite Mysteries. (View Less)


text:
Welcome to The Cake Shop Bakery, Tallahassee's best bakery, stop in to check out our sweet treats!
Our bakery and store-front hours are Monday-Friday 8:30-6:00pm and Saturday's 10:00-2:00pm. Our phone and order hours are Monday-Friday 8:30-3:00pm and Saturday's 10:00-2:00pm. Whether you are searching for a special birthday cake or simply looking for a sweet ending to an everyday meal, The Cake Shop offers something for everyone. This is a one of a kind bakery, where the aroma of home-style baking weakens even the strongest will. The Cake Shop offers a wide variety of freshly baked goods daily; gourmet cookies, fresh apple cake, cheesecake slices, chocolate eclairs, strawberry torte, pound cake, lemon bars, decadent brownies, shortbread, and over 20 flavors of cupcakes that no one can resist.
Call us today! (850) 386-2253
Find us at 1908 Capital Circle NE in Tallahassee, Florida.


text:
15 Jan 2019
June 14, 2012
Redknapp: if only he'd tried to be Spurs
I didn't think I needed to vent; I thought I'd said it all in this letter back in April. Turns out I hadn't, so here goes.
If he'd toed the party line, he'd still be manager.
If he hadn't flirted with the England job, and if he hadn't tried to conduct contract negotiations in public, he'd still be manager.
But that is Harry – if he thinks he can improve his own position by talking to his friends in the press, he'll do it – without caring about whether it brings the club into disrepute, or makes the chairman look daft.
At the end of March, when Redknapp was being asked about the England job (on a weekly basis) he said:
"They [the players] don't care whether I'm the manager next year. They wouldn't lose any sleep over that. That's football.
Footballers play the game, they come in every day and train. Someone else walks in here tomorrow – the king is dead long live the king! They don't worry. They don't think 'Harry is going to England' or 'he is going to go somewhere else'.
Fast-forward to June, and he seemed to have had a total turn-around:
"If they [the club] don't extend it [his contract] and I go into my last year, it is not an easy one when players know you have only got a year left.
It is not a case of me looking for security. What it is about is players knowing you have only got year left on your contract and knowing that it doesn't work, basically. I think it's a situation of, 'well, he might not be here next year'."
This just about sums the man up; he's hinting at his own players leaving – weakening our bargaining position, putting thoughts in players mind – in order to push the board into offering him a longer contract.
And it is because of these sorts of comments, I'm almost sure, that he is no longer manager.
His record largely speaks for itself – two top four finishes, Champions League football; we've "never had it so good" ("…and if you know your history…") – but his short-term approach to achieve these finishes does leave a somewhat sour taste.
Bringing in the likes of Friedel, Gallas, Parker, Nelsen, Saha – all ageing players – plus Adebayor only on loan, means that we have another summer of rebuilding ahead of us and would have done even if he'd still been there. He has marginalised a large section of the squad, leaving them ready to quit the club (or already having quit in Kranjcar's case), and meaning that we have a core of 12-15 players who will realistically be considered for selection next season.
Congratulations to Redknapp for some wonderful football during his tenure. Congratulations for the run of league finishes. Congratulations on bringing Champions League football to the Lane – it was great.
But you never really had me feeling involved – I never felt like you were one of us, or even wanted to be. I don't know whether it was the fact that you commuted all that way because you couldn't leave Sandbanks. I don't know whether it was the fact that you referred to us (the lifeblood of the club) as "them", whether it was calling fans who phoned TalkSport "idiots", or whether it was the "they've never had it so good" line. Some will miss you because of the relative success that you brought, but to me supporting a club is about a lot more than achieving 4th place finishes, and for that reason I'm not crying.
Good piece Windy, and also lets not forget that the club supported him all through his tax trials as well, and that is the thanks we get!
Sid Trotter
An excellent point.
Cheers Simon!
Thoughtful and well argued piece Windy. But personally I'm a better-the-devil-you-know man. We binned Jol and made a big mistake. I think players DO like certainty and longevity. I'd have given Harry three more years. Unless Daniel has a replacement lined up (Martinez?)it's hard to see this move as anything but a reaction to the awful disappointment of missing out on a CL place, albeit by a quirk of the rules.
Can totally appreciate that PoV, George.
I know a lot of fans want success at any costs – probably the same fans who wouldn't complain if we were bought out by an oligarch – but it seems like you're somewhere in the middle.
Personally I'd rather feel a part of the club that's all pulling together in the same direction but finishes 5th or 6th than one with a manager who couldn't care less about the traditions and history or the fans but will deliver decent league finishes.
Good piece Windy. It's clear for everyone that he wasn't sacked because of results, which have been very good for the most part. Even so there was always a sense of short-sightedness in his tenure, despite great football and good results he never had me convinced regarding a long term vision for the club. It was all a bit stop gap living in the moment with 'Arry and that's why his relationship with Levy, a meticolous planner, never quite worked out.
Torleiv – totally agree with your summary. Imagine there was a massive clash of personalities between Levy/Redknapp.
I agree with all of that, just hope Levy has a better rabbit up his sleeve than Moyes or Martinez otherwise I'd have stuck with Harry warts and all.
Thanks for the good times Harry, but I won't miss your media-whore personality. If only you'd been intelligent enough to keep your head down and your mouth shut.
Cheers for the comment – agree with your last para. I think Moyes deserves a club where he has cash, think he could be a decent appointment actually.
Spot on Windy. He was always pessimistic when it came to Spurs but sounded so optimistic when it came to England in Euro 2012. Remember all those stupid statements like 'we have no divine right to finish 4th and all that jazz'. All his friends in the media are in mourning today. One look at twitter and you'll feel someone has passed away
That's a great point re: pessimism. Some of the key print journalists were shameful today.
Well said Windy, I actually posted on COYS almost identical comments regarding the players not being affected when he was talking about England, but being affected when he was trying to get a contract. He has done a good job, for which I thank him, but I am also relieved now that he has gone and hope that we can get a manager who is 'Spurs' in image and playing style.
I agree with you about him never feeling like one of us and having been a supporter for over 50 years now, I half resented his references to 'them'. Love your work mate and particularly enjoy your bits on the loanees. Cheers for all.
Thanks very much for the comment, really appreciate it. The contract/players thing was such blatant hypocrisy and yet the press seemed to totally ignore it; frustrating.
This has been in the offering for some time,some of Arry's decisions on and off the pitch were damn right confusing in anyones books,Arry cost us 3rd place and he knows it
there are too many examples to name and that is not just this season but last season as well!
I'm happy that Arry has gone I just hope Levy gives the new man (Pep) a war chest so we can build on what we have got
Shelf SideYid
I agree, and I didn't even go into his failure to see us home to 3rd, mate. Lots of other issues, but I feel the media whoring is what eventually got him the chop.
The short termism is the thing that tilts the balance for me. Parker and Friedel I could accept because they made a clear and instant improvement to the first XI. But Nelsen and Saha? And his failure to get any sort of value from Pienaar was really highlighted by his form for Everton. We will be doomed to for ever wonder what might have been if one or two players of quality had been added in January (or even not allowed to leave). Oh for a Papisse Cisse…
We really did need that boost of a classy player coming in in Jan, I think.
Being a Spurs lover didn't save Jol. For better or worse Levy removes the emotion from his thinking and its purely down to Harry losing that lead and not getting CL football.
Probably right, but I don't think Redknapp's inappropriate relationship with the media helped.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think that if it was simply for not getting into the CL or securing 3rd he would have been sacked weeks ago. I believe he had been offered a new contract months ago but didn't want to sign because of the England possibility. I really don't think he has anyone but himself to blame. Either way, him always talking to the media about everything was never going to help him in this situation.
I think Levy would have put up with the slump from 3rd to 4th if everything was perfect off the pitch. Teamed with his constant self-serving chat, it was deemed too much methinks.
In any other industry, if a person under contract makes it known to his employers that he was showing interest in another job, he or she would probably be instantly dismissed. Redknapp has only himself to blame for his downfall and he has paid the price for declaring his interest in another job, and costing his employers millions of pounds in revenue through our failure to qualify for the CL. Lets hope
that someone comes in who has an idea what to do when things go wrong on the football pitch. He was very lucky to have managed our fabulous football club. Come on you Spurs.
Spot on. COYS!
Good article Windy, just about sums up hidden thoughts behind the modern day football club. Gone are the days when fans bled the teams colours (any team)it's now down to money. Gone are the days of loyalty from anybody involved with a football club including supporters. Mostly the fans are still loyal but the majority are only loyal when the money is spent like Man. City & Chelsea. Players are just mercenaries & go where the pay is better. Jimmy Greaves asked Bill Nicholson for a pay rise only for Bill to say "do you think you deserve one, your well paid now. Go & do what your payed for & score goals. Jimmy left his office & history speaks for itself. Now players just think of themselves & their wallet, they are all overpaid for what they do. Kicking a bag of wind around! When they reitre they just don't think of hetting a normal everyday job like the fans who have spent good, hard earned money to follow their team. The average way of working people is around 25 to 30 thousand a year NOT £100,000 + per week. Will be interesting to see who comes in next & lets hope they can build on & improve a team that was on the verge.
Thought-provoking stuff mate, and I agree with you. Rather depressing, though!
Spot on, Windy. I too believe it's the way he behaved that got him fired rather than the football. That said, his naivety, crudeness and lack of tactical nous was a common thread in his pronouncements, his unsavoury attempts at contract extension and ultimately his football and team management.
Totally with you on the extras that I didn't mention.
Right as always Windy. He brought his own downfall. Not sad to see him go, but will remember the good moments fondly. Hoping for Martinez personally.
I like Martinez but not convinced on his ability to organise a defence…
Very well written mate and spot on…was never in it with his heart and was ready to jump ship if England came knocking…was always about him and always will be so good luck and god bless u Harry…just hope he doesn't come out with too much rubbish in the press and goes with dignity
Appreciate it, cheers. Agree with the England stuff – he can't feel hard done by after the way he behaved.
For me it was not the collapse in the Arsenal game, the loss to Stoke or the loss to ManC that made it clear that Harry had lost his focus, it was the Aston Villa game where he simply appeared to be content with a draw. His two-faced communication post-season just proves that Spurs was not in his long-term plans, so why should he be in ours?
Interesting thought that re: Villa. I personally think we should have secured 3rd by then but, even with 10 men, Villa did seem there for the taking.
I think the real problem is who is going to leave with him or be replaced by the new manager, and I don't necessarily mean players. While alot of the familiar faces are interchangeable for my liking there are many lower profile characters that have had a significant effect on our improvement fundamentally, especially in the youth developement side.
Inglethorpe, Ebleton and Mcdermott for example have given us a system of developement and integration that should rival our competitors, I would hope this remained intact. How long is it since we had a kid that came into the first team and looked like staying? We've had kids with the quality, but always lacking that extra little bit, when was the last one? king? carr? Lennon was an in at the deep end test and thats before we exclude players we didnt develop pre16. I may be missing someone obvious, but more to the point we now have something that looks like a sustainable production line
I really don't think you have to worry about JMcD or AI leaving as a result of HR being sacked. Tim Sherwood as an outside possibility – if he doesn't see his reserves/development squad going anywhere, but the Academy coaches have all been through changes of management before and I'd suggest that a lot of the work they do is far more progressive than that of the first team. Arguably there is good logical reason for this to be the case, but they would have been more affected by the departure of say Ricardo Moniz, Frank Arnesen or in terms of philosophy Juande Ramos.
While I tend to agree with this, it really has only been the last 3 years that we started getting the last step right. Not the developing of young talent, but the actual getting them into the team in a sensible way via careful selection of loans etc
I'd say that we've been on the right track for a bit over 3 years, but are only now starting to reap the benefit.
I don't think we need to worry about JM or AI leaving, though…
I can't believe these comments, I mean really? Surely the most important thing is winning games as a manager. He wins games! More than any other manager we've had in years. So what if he was interested in the England job, his dream job came up, he was interested, he didn't get it, he could have just carried on now. We don't deserve success with supporters like this. Harry brought you all champions league football, some of the best football we've ever seen and played the 'spurs' way. But all you can remember is the last few months of the season (where we still finished 4th!).I hope your all happy when were mid table next season playing boring football under Moyes, but at least Moyes dose not talk to the media hey boys.
From his PoV, yes, the main job is winning games. But he also has a responsibility to respect the values of his bosses and traditions of the club. Every time he said something inappropriate in a press conference, Levy must have been wincing.
Like I say in the article, supporting a football club isn't just about success/failure – it's so much more.
It is his job to win games, but what was he doing then when we were comfortably in 3rd? Granted, finishing 4th is nice but not after being in the position we were in. 4th means nothing. All it means is that you (usually) have to chance to qualify for the CL. I thank Harry for what he did at Tottenham and I enjoyed the way the team played but I did not enjoy him.
100% Windy
Cheers Bob!
Very well written piece Windy and I completely agree with you. He has done a good job but I just don't like him. I am sick and tired of his verbal diarrhea and it is no surprise that was eventually his downfall. His comments last week were a disgrace and only went to re-emphasize just how self-serving a man he is. At best he was just talking crap to get himself a better contract; at worst he was admitting that the reason we lost that massive lead was down to his public flirtation with the England job.
Totally agree with you, and appreciate the comment – thanks!
I don't care that Harry wasn't one of us, or that he's a media darling. We've had three seasons of 4th, 5th, 4th, and with our limited resources that's an excellent achievement.
Of course he blew it when we were at 3rd spot but it's not his fault that Chelsea won the CL is it?
Some Spurs fans have no patience and want short-term solutions to everything. And that could be our downfall.
Good luck to our new manager, because if he doesn't get at least a top four spot or silverware next season, another witch hunt from impatient, deluded and unrealistic fans will begin!
Thanks for the many great memories Harry. Some of us will miss you.
I want the opposite – I want a long-term solution, which I personally don't think Harry was.
I would be happy to appoint a long-term manager and would take a couple of years of finishing lower whilst he gets to grips with the task at hand.
I blame John Terry,Redknapp's head was turned the moment Capello walked.That was the turning point of our season,and it kick started with Chelsea's Mr wonderful.
I appreciate all that Harry has done for us,but as someone has highlighted in a previous post,Redknapp is a media whore who doesn't know when to keep quiet. This has only added to his downfall in my opinion.
Redknapp needed to forget about England until the season was over, but he kept answering the questions as he wanted to keep the FA's mouth watering.
Well written as always, Windy, and you are of course spot on.
I was there, singing "Harry Redknapp – we want you to stay" with the rest at the Newcastle-game in february. I wasn't sure then, but thought it be better if he stayed untill the end of the season, than to have the whole upheaval midseason, with no transfer window to support the new manager for the first 6 months.
If only I had known then what I do now… Our abysmal run from the mentioned Newcastle-game untill the end of the season could not have been worse either way. We could have had a donkey at the helm, and still manage the same points tally.
Add to that, both the "young and exciting" replacement managers have now been snapped up by Liverpool and Villa. Unless Levy's got Pep Guardiola in his sleeve, that probably mean we're left with a choice between Moyes or Martinez. How would Bale, Modric, VdV and our other high-profile players take that?
We're do or die now. Levy MUST get this next appointment right. More than anything, Redknapps replacement will be a statement to our players that we're serious, we mean business. I'm afraid that if we go for Martinez (or even Moyes), we'll be signaling to our current squad (let alone transfer targets) that we're content to be a "second tier" club in the Premier League. That would certainly mean a farewell to Modric and Bale, and possibly also VdV.
Now, if Levy does have a world class replacement lined up (a certain Mr. Capello, a certain Mr. Guardiola, or a certain mr. Mourinho) we could very well retain the services of all our high profiles, and to build on what we did achieve last season, which was at times stunning football, brilliant attacking and flowing, and perhaps in time challenge for honours.
Get it wrong, and we're back in mid-table obscurity before you can say balaclavasareveryhotinthedesert!
Junior19 – cracking stuff. Although I'm not sure about Moyes, he definitely has something about him…
Sorry, although nicely written, this piece is sentimental tosh.
Does Bale, Modric and Adebayor make you feel they are one of us? That they've got Spurs running through their blood and that their love for the club far outweighs the disappointment of not reaching the CL or the relative paucity of EPL wages paid by the club compared with the new money in the game? Of course not.
We need to wake up and stop deluding ourselves:
1. Harry was brought in at a time of crisis and he succeeded. Since then, he did what he's always done, and bought tried and tested (ageing) players who helped us climb up the table while Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea all wobbled at the same time. Arsenal and Chelsea recovered, and Spurs – deluded by the press and by us fans running away with ourselves – declined. And embarrassingly so.
2. Then England (never came) calling. And Arry (I ain't no f*****g wheeler-dealer, I can't read or write) Redknapp made everything worse. He has since admitted he would have left Spurs at the end of the season for England, and listening to his tactical analysis again and his punditry over the Euros, thank f**k for England he wasn't offered the job.
3. What is 'the Spurs' way'? What is 'I never felt he was one of us'? Every club up and down the country wants loyalty from players and a set of family-like principles to which their fans can aspire?
If we want to seriously take the club to the next level, let's get a decent stadium to generate the revenue to buy a better squad and increase our commercial advantage abroad by taking B teams littered with a couple of stars to Asia, Africa, the Far East. Let's pay for better transport links, because TFL ain't gonna do it. And let's start building from first principles: a long-term manager that nourishes academy youth into Spurs men.
Whoever comes in next season. Expect more of the same, if you're lucky. But we're 10 years behind the true Top 4 and the Arse, and with Levy and Lewis (rather than a pluralistic board) holding the purse-strings, it will be more pacifying and soul-searching next year, while we struggle to maintain a campaign for an entire season.
You're right Windy that Harry had to go, but the reasons why are far deeper than your blog suggests.
All the best,
Thanks for the comment, pal.
Re point 1 – don't disagree with any of that until you get to "deluded by the press and by us fans running away with ourselves" – you think that was the reason we failed to get 3rd? For me, it's all on Redknapp – be it court case, England, tactical errors, lack of rotation or otherwise.
Re point 2: agree.
Re: point 3: 'I never felt he was one of us' – he made little effort to get to know the traditions of the club or to empathise with our fans, which was a real shame.
Spurs you never fail to amaze me, I have been a life long Spurs Fan ever since i could first understand what football was all about. Over the years my understanding on that has changed. Its no longer a game were eleven guys on each side try to out play and score more goals than the other side. Its now all about Business and the 90 minute part on the pitch is a very small of what the clubs are all about. Spurs again have proved that to me today. Why do you sack a manager who has got you playing the best football seen at the lane for years, They did the same with Martin Jol and to a point Terry Venables. I'm sorry if i'm missing things here but i just don't get it. What makes it worse is the so called Spurs fans who are now shouting off their mouths saying its the best thing for the club and calling him all sorts of foul names. The same guys who when we had a fantastic run in the champions league were calling him a God. FOR FUCK SAKE I JUST DON"T GET IT
"Its now all about Business and the 90 minute part on the pitch is a very small of what the clubs are all about."
– Isn't it just, and how depressing.
Agree that Redknapp has achieved some good things, but his lack of respect for the club, the fans, and his boss has been unpleasant to say the least.
Just glad Levy made the decision after Chelsea had announced RDM. Not sure where Harry will end up, not sure I care.
Good Work Windy. You've pretty much summed it all up for me. There was a piece in Football365 where it said "You can afford to mouth off at a reasonably small club like Portsmouth, but not at Spurs. Not when your chairman is a fairly ruthless businessman."
Arry's hype will get him another job, but he'll never manage a bigger club then Spurs.
If you think Parker is too 'ageing' for Spurs, we'll have him. He gives his heart and soul every single match for Spurs and for England. You don't deserve him.
Don't get me wrong, no problem with signing Parker, but he needed to be teamed with long-term signings.
I think Levey made the decision at least year ago, thats why no real money has been spent. I think DL was planning to give the next guy in a 'war chest' to spend and was banking on a) us having CL football and b) arry either banged up or in the England job. Im surprised the relationship between the 2 lasted so long, especially after the Mordric saga last season, with arry trying almost get Modric to go or up his wages, whilst DL was pulling in the other direction.
Unfortunately getting CL football backfired, which may have kiboshed any pre-arranged agreements with his planned next man in. But I really think Levey is very shrewd and will have a plan up his sleeve, hes not a gambeler and I can see him not having the next man sorted before outing Redknapp.
Trust Levey, right now I think hes is more important to us than Redknapp or Modric for that matter. @darrenjackson75
You could be right Darren that the decision was made some time ago. I personally think in an ideal world we'd have stuck with him, but his comments on top of not getting 3rd left Levy with little choice.
Good piece windy/ I have been saying for the last 6 months that harry had taken us as far as he could dont get me wrong i wish him all the best and appreciate what he did for us but i am not sorry to see him go, as long as mr levy has something planned for the future what about the fabio rumours any one else heard anything
AVB seems to be the firm favourite, mate, and I would personally be quite happy with that. What do you think?
The boy done good and being a spurs fan since my dads dad was a young boy I will miss him. His head was turned by the England post and I respect that as he would of had the lads in the national team playing out of their skin. But alas being the gobby mouth that Harry is he walks away with the memories. I really wanna know what the players think even if it is just hear say. And if Harry had of got three more years and won a title then I think this article would of had a different tone to it.
Don't hate Harry he is a product of modern football.
The only people at the club which are spurs are the supporters, not the players( bar ledly) manager or chairmen.
To them it is buissiness not a passion.
The only interests that were considered during this decision were that of David and his faceless men.
Here's my views from an Arsenal fan's perspective http://theubiquitousmind.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spurs-back-on-decline-as-redknapp-is.html
Very nicely written piece, Manu, but you're only coming from the "league success is everything" PoV.
Aside from the fact that I do genuinely think that a better tactician could take us further than Redknapp over the next 5 years (although probably not over the next 2), there are so many "off-pitch" downsides to Redknapp, as I tried to outline.
Yer I agree that he perhaps didn't have enough personal attachment to the club which is of course extremely important but that doesn't just come instantly had he stayed longer he might have developed more of personal attachment. In terms of success I just think it was a terrible decision to sack him. However, now that is is done I would suggest someone like Moyes or Martinez as a replacement.
I love the way that those that wanted Redknapp gone, now spend their entire time trying to downgrade what our expectations should be.
The bottom line is this; if we don't get a top 4 finish next season, we will once again under Levy be going backwards. It's been the pattern of ENIC's ownership since day 1. What amuses me is how few Spurs fans can see through the facade and understand how his financial control over the last two seasons has shaped the position we are now in.
A lessor manager would have failed far sooner under those financial conditions.
Maybe downgrading expectations because a new manager will take time to settle? Seems acceptable to me.
Personally think you have to focus on medium to long term rather than short term (something Redknapp failed to do). AVB will have more chance of taking Spurs to "the next level" than Redknapp IMO, but that's pretty much missing the point of my article.
So much more to being a Spurs fan than 4th plae finishes IMO.
Downgrading expectations is pretty ironic when you consider that not being in the CL this new season is one of the sticks used to beat Redknapp with.
As for failing to focus on the medium to long term, the reality is completely the opposite, just witness Harry Kanes commments in respect of how much redknap helped him. It's a shame that once again a throw away line such as that isn't properly examined in light of our complete lack of spending for the past two seasons and more importantly the failure by our Chairmen to do the deals for new players that he told Redknapp were within in his reach, which he subsequently failed to conclude a single one of.
That guy with only a brain cell that call himself a manager only had himself in his mind. He thought he got the England job and yet it was his mates in the media that wanted him as England manager. Now that he is sacked, he would'nt keep his mouth shut. This is the nature of the twat that is Redknob.


text:
DailyDirt: Cupcakes With a Twist
from the urls-we-dig-up dept
- How about an ATM that takes your cash and dispenses cupcakes? Sprinkles, the "pioneer" of cupcake bakeries, has set up a 24-Hour Sprinkles cupcake ATM that is restocked day and night with a variety of freshly baked cupcakes. The machine also dispenses cupcake mixes, apparel, and... cupcakes for dogs(!) [url]
- The world's most expensive cupcake -- The Golden Phoenix -- costs over $1,000. The cupcake is made by Bloomsbury's Cupcakes in Dubai, and it's made from the finest chocolate and covered in 23 carats of edible gold sheets. [url]
- The Meatloaf Bakery in Chicago sells savory meat cupcakes. Each cupcake is a self-contained meal, and there are eight different varieties. For example, the "Wing and a Prayer Loaf" features ground chicken and celery topped with hot wing sauce and a blue cheese crust. [url]


text:
DeathWatch: Terminus Sanctio
Terminus Sanctio is a Warhammer 40k campaign based in the Jericho Reach. The campaign presents a duality where the players are both the protagonists (a Death Watch Team) and the antagonists (Black Crusades). The group switches back and forth between the two groups as each team pursues its own missions and objectives across time and events to the point where they intersect in a confrontation against an evil that threatens the interests of both the Imperium and the powers of Chaos… though given the vagaries of Chaos, the actions of the compact may vary well decide to join in with the "evil" or attempt to usurp it.
As this campaign is being run from two portals and is linear in nature, inactivity on this portal most likely means an unexpected break or the campaign is being run from that of the antagonists perspective on the Black Crusade portal.
Visit the Black Crusade sister site for the other side of the coin of this campaign: Diablolos Inimicus.
Note that this is an online game at 7:00pm EST pretty much every Sunday. We use MapTools with Wolphs Warhammer 40k Framework.


text:
(Caution: Portal 2 ending spoilers ahead!)
Portal 2 had a satisfying, if ambiguous, ending. The player, in the form of Chell, finally got to breathe the air free of Aperture. There was no deer.
But what comes next for our silent heroine? One fan started this music video using Valve's new Source Filmmaker. It's the very early stages of a work in progress. It doesn't tell us what Chell's future holds. Not yet. But it does look gorgeous, bird, cube, and all.
exile vilify, rough pose work [qqmoarz tumblr]


text:
Joke of the Day
Submit Your Joke
Joke |
List Games | Add A GameRandom Drinking Game
List Recipes |
Add A Recipe
Drink of the Day
Random Drink Recipe
Home > Priceless Pictures
There are 90 Pictures in the Priceless Pictures Category
Page 9 of 10
Find Priceless Pictures links on Joke-Pages.comDisplay User-Created Galleries
Please Note:
We offer this image gallery for entertainment purposes as a service on the Joke-Pages.com website.
Unless otherwise noted, none of these images are the property of Joke-Pages.com and may be copyrighted by their perspective
owner. If you are the legal owner or authorized
representative of the copyright holder of any
of these images and wish to have your picture
removed, please feel free to contact
us and we will endeavor to remove said picture


text:
|2012-05-30, 16:49
|Link #1
Join Date: Mar 2012
Hatfields & McCoys
Has anyone been watching this, its pretty fantastic so far. Surprised that history channel has turned out a series this good. Kevin Costner and Bill Paxton do a great job of portraying these characters and their is plenty of action and bloodshed. The acting and story is superb and I would say as far as film goes this is one of the best I have seen in a very long time and is far better then anything you will see in a movie theater. As far as mini series go this is right up there in quality with band of brothers.
|2012-06-02, 23:25
|Link #2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
I just finished the third part, and I gotta say I really enjoyed it. It was definitely well acted, as Costner and Paxton truly seemed to fade into their roles. Not a happy story, however, that's for damn sure
One thing I didn't get though,
|2012-06-03, 09:08
|Link #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Ah, ok, that sucks, he seemed like a fair man.
I really hope History does more productions like this, instead of all those ugh reality shows like Ice Road Truckers. Well, apparently the ratings for the premiere were phenomenal, highest ever for that station and one of the highest ever for cable, with 13.9 mil viewers. And then the finale managed to beat that with 14.29! I mean, wow. Surely that has to bode well for similar quality productions in the future.
Surprised no one else seems to have watched this It wasn't perfect of course, but still quite well done.
|2012-06-03, 12:18
|Link #5
Join Date: Mar 2012
yea I think its an instant classic like band of brothers was. I was very surprised that history channel did this considering all the junk they have been airing recently.
I am also surprised there hasn't been more interest on this board seeing as how well the story was done.
|2012-06-04, 08:53
|Link #6
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 61
Despite the fact it is a "drama inspired by history" (not necessarily accurate in all aspects), it is a lot more information about the feud than probably 99% of the viewers knew before starting. Most people just blink and remember a few cartoon snippets of silly hillbillies blowing each other up with Bugs Bunny or some other character in the mix.
|2012-06-04, 09:34
|Link #7
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
On a related note, to look at the wiki entry for the feud and related people, there are a damn lot of "citation neededs" at the ends of sentences. So I'm wondering how much of that article was just filled out with information people got from watching the show
Anyway, one of the things I wished had been different was that the two men didn't really meet again before the end. And I mean really meet. Sure they saw each other on the battlefield, but they were just shooting and screaming each other's name. But before that? I don't remember the last time they interacted. Well, maybe that didn't happen historically, so I guess it's good if they stuck to the real events.
It's funny, though (and by funny I mean horribly tragic). You may realize it earlier on, but it becomes most visible in that final battle. Hatfield fled from one war, sick of all the fighting and death, wanting to find peace, but all he found was another battlefield on his doorstep. And McCoy...well, it seemed that war never even ended for him.
|Thread Tools


text:
Ill. workers' comp insurance rate down 4.5 percent
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — The rate used to calculate workers' compensation insurance premiums has dropped again, a direct result of reforms Gov. Pat Quinn signed into law in 2011, his aides said Monday.
The National Council on Compensation Insurance, a rating agency, issued a rate that reflects a 4.5 percent drop in the statewide average.
The council issues rates for various categories of employees, such as truck drivers. Insurance companies that use the rate then multiply it by the number of employees in a company to determine a premium for covering workers' compensation claims.
Quinn's office says over the last three years, the rate has dropped 13.3 percent and resulted in $315 million savings on workers' compensation premiums for Illinois businesses.
"Illinois had one of the most burdensome workers' compensation systems in the country," the Democratic governor said in a prepared statement. "We turned that statistic around and (are) saving hundreds of millions of dollars for our businesses and keeping the system honest to our workers."
Quinn said the latest reduction could save another $110 million. A spokesman for the National Council on Compensation Insurance did not return a call seeking comment.
Lawmakers sent Quinn a package of reforms in 2011 that cut medical fees, capped the number of weeks of payment for carpal tunnel syndrome, made it harder for intoxicated workers to win claims and allowed employers to organize medical networks for handling cases.
State Department of Insurance actuaries must confirm the rate and approve it, which takes about 60 days. If accepted, it takes effect in January. Deputy Director James Stephens said about 70 percent of companies followed the rate last year.
Illinois Department of Insurance: http://insurance.illinois.gov/


text:
VZT needed a new logo design and created a contest on 99designs.
A winner was selected from 70 designs submitted by 30 freelance designers.
A new product to market needs a creative but professional logo. The product is a pillow that will help breast feeding babies. Please read the brief for more information about how this product works.
More design for this product will be needed later.
This product is new to market and need a good brand logo.
The product is a pillow that will help breast feeding babies. Take a look here for more information about the product.
More design for this product will be needed later.
We need this in vector format.
- Clean design
- A variant of the color purple must be included in the logo somewhere, but it does not have to be the main color.
- Have to work on black background cause it will be on the product
- Needs to also work on white paper (maybe a negative of the logo)
- Maybe it could work with an abstract outline of the product?
- Maybe just good font combinations will be better?
- But it should have some graphic or icon that will relate to the new brand
- A logo with too many details so it will be hard to put on the product
Find out how a design contest works or learn more about our logo design services.


text:
Yamaha mLAN Manual in English
Yamaha mLAN Manual, PDF file in English, Length: 7 pages, Size: 157Kb. Instant download by payment and review.
Yamaha mLAN Manual, PDF file in English, Length: 7 pages, Size: 157Kb. Instant download by payment and review.
The manual was written in by Yamaha. The language is listed as follows: Manual English. The manual is applied to the following one product model as follows: mLAN. The manual was created in Portable Document Format, called as PDF manual. The PDF document file with the name of mlantoolse.pdf has 7 pages with the file size of 157Kb. The digital document is original with no watermarks.
|Yamaha Musical Instruments
|File info:
|PDF / 157Kb / 7 pages
|Bookmark and List of Contents
|PDF information:
|PDF File Details
Please share your valued options or reviews with our users for instant download. Your review or comment is valuable and highly appreciated. A $2.99 discounted price is a return of your options. You can make a payment of the full price for instand download as well if no comment or review submitted.The following is the rates and comments by visitors based on their experiences.