National Trends in the Hebrew Adaptations for Children of the Grimm’s Fairy Tales between the Years 1897 –1924.

National Trends in the Hebrew Adaptations for Children of the Grimm’s Fairy Tales between the Years  1897 –1924.

                                        Dr.   Fogel   Shimona

The Brothers Grimm collected fairy tales and published their collections over the years 1812-1857. Although theirs was not the first published collection of folk tales, as there had been several previous collections as well as individual fairy tales published centuries before in western culture, such as Italian, French, German, Yiddish and other languages, there is no argument as to their unprecedented success and popularity in children’s literature worldwide. The Grimms’ collection has been translated and adapted into hundreds of languages, and is the collection that continues to appear in new editions and translations to the present time.

For years, the story of the Brothers Grimm’s work has become a kind of myth in itself. The story has taken hold of how they journeyed throughout Germany and wrote down folktales precisely as told to them by village women, as they had been handed down from generation to generation, and published the stories exactly as recorded. Scholars Rölleke Heinz, followed mainly by John Ellis, shattered this “myth” through a comparison of the versions throughout the seven editions published by the Brothers Grimm, and some of the original manuscripts in the original collection. They proved that the Brothers Grimm adapted the authentic texts, rewrote them and introduced changes[1].(Rölleke Heinz 1975, Ellis John 1983)

Despite the fact that the first German edition was published in 1812, the tales were not translated into Hebrew until about eighty-five years later, precisely during the period of national rebirth, Hatehiyah, the time of the resurgence of national identity. The first Hebrew translation was by Solomon Berman, in 1897[2].

Two opposing viewpoints lay at the foundation of the point of origin of those who generated the Jewish National Movement. One approach desired the creation of a new “Eretz Yisraeli” Hebrew culture, unconnected to Diaspora traits or Exilic mentality. They recognized that this new creation could only be brought about through educating the “new Jew,” with a new identity based on the Promised Land and not on the Exile.

The point of origin of the second outlook, held by the group led by Ahad Ha’am[3] and Bialik[4], was the viewpoint that it was both impossible and incorrect to cut off Hebrew culture from its root sources. They firmly believed that it was necessary to create a link and maintain continuity between the revival of Hebrew and millennia-old Jewish culture, thorough the use of new tools taken from modern western culture. They, too, wanted to form a new identity, but, in their opinion, it had to be constructed on the foundation of the cultural and intellectual property of the past. They sought out a renewed interpretation of Judaism that would refresh the old and suit it to modern life, while emphasizing Judaism’s humanistic values, which Judaism had bequeathed to western civilization. They understood that without the connection to Jewish sources, Jews would not be able to justify a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Without Jewish culture, the new Palestinian Jew would be an empty mask, a bare skeleton of a house without foundations or firm pillars in the earth, rather than a home.

The theme of the crystallization of the modern Jewish identity engaged the Zionist movement from its early beginnings  and continues to engage it even now. The  adaptors in the age of Jewish rebirth followed in the footsteps of the Romantics as well as the nineteenth century German nationalists, and turned to the fairy tales with the goal of crystallizing a new Jewish national identity. The Jewish intellectuals who strove to form the “new Jew” could not arouse interest in the traditional rabbinic Judaism that they desired to change, while on the other hand, they were attempting to cope with the challenge of the dominant western culture that threatened to swallow up Judaism.

In their desperate effort not to lose the unique aspects of Judaism, they turned to the Jewish cultural treasures and tradition of the distant past that had been neglected by rabbinic Judaism, i.e., the Bible and the Aggada [the midrashic tradition of legends and stories]. At the same time, they attempted to provide meaning to the core essence of Judaism and to interpret their Jewish heritage through use of concepts and terms taken from the victorious modernism.

Since the late nineteenth century, the Jewish intellectuals understood that success or failure of the Zionist enterprise and the revival of Hebrew culture lay in their response to this problem. According to their perception, the intercultural connection constituted the exclusive key that would enable growth and resurgence, that would bring about the revolution in the traditional image of the Jew to the image of the “new Jew.” This would bring other revolutions in its wake, and guarantee their success. They also wanted to bring about change in opinions and influence that change, but understood that direct preaching alone to the target audience of the older generation would not work. They thought they would succeed in introducing change through the younger generation, and therefore seized upon children’s literature in general and the adaptation of the Grimms’ fairy tales in particular. Their belief in the suggestive power of children’s literature was boundless, and they had a firm vision that they could transmit important messages of national revival through such stories.

One of the ways of this attempt was expressed in how Hebrew authors and thinkers adapted Grimms’ Fairy Tales. During this period they were already considered classics of literature, while at the same time, the adaptors provided the stories with a Jewish national interpretation. All of the adaptors of the stories in the corpus[5] were faithful to the norm, and made the a priori decision to adapt the stories rather than simply translate them, since “Judaizing” the material was more important to them than utter faithfulness to the original. Retelling fairy tales expressed the ideal of synthesis and concretized it.  In order to achieve their purpose, they often changed the characters’ names as well as titles of the tales in the proto-text, thus associating them with names from Jewish culture, including the new, revived Hebrew literature, not just Biblical literature. For example, “Aschenputtel,” or Cinderella in English, was changed by Frishman to Lo-Ruhama, literally, “she who was shown no mercy,” thus associated with the Biblical prophecy of Hosea (Hosea, Chapter 1) and also associated with Y. L. Gordon’s poem, “My Sister Ruhama.”[6] This change metamorphosized the tale’s heroine into a symbol of the Jewish people and raised the question as to “the solution of the Jewish national problem.”

Another example: the fairy  tale “Sleeping Beauty”, whose german name means “briar rose”, was translated by Ben Eliezer as “Lily among the thorns”[7].

In Jewish Biblical exegesis and in the Kabbalah this is a central theme, in which the lily represents the Jewish people and the thorns are the gentiles surrounding them. According to this interpretation the Jewish culture, or the Jewish people in exile, is the beauty who sleeps for a hundred years, and must be woken up and infused with new life. She must integrate into modern life, develop within it, all without sacrificing her character and individuality. This is the only way to redemption, and it carries the solution to the  problem of the Jewish people.

The adaptors took the German symbols found in the tales, and cast Jewish contents and symbols into the available molds of the German stories. In addition, they inserted allusions form Jewish culture, thus demonstrating what their intent on the issue of the inter-cultural integration, and the synthesis that they so desired.

The connection between the German materials and the materials found in Jewish culture and its sources and their associations to the fairy tales facilitated a new interpretation as well as providing additional illumination. Moreover, the allusions transformed the adaptation into a multifaceted text, because they enabled the addition of another layer of textual interpretation over and above their psychological, social and literary interpretation: a Hebrew national interpretation that alluded to contemporary issues of the time, and sometimes even engulfed the individualistic aspects covertly. In order to accomplish this synthesis, the adaptors did not hesitate to connect materials that seemed on the surface to lack any connection, and to waive the symbols that create multiple meaning through the decoding of the covert level of the text. Thus, these replacements sometimes lost the cultural connections attached to the original symbol located in the proto-text, however, the metamorphoses served the adaptor’s purposes. The adaptors sometimes gave up the western civilization’s symbols since it was more important to them to connect the story to motifs linked to the essential historical being of the Jewish people and to its continuity, to the Return of the People to its Land, and to the Utopia of the Kingdom of the House of David in Zion. Through their adaptations, the writers linked their target audience both to the heroes of the folktales and to the ancient heroes of Hebrew culture. Thus, they created a continuum between the distant past and their present generation. The a priori decision on synthesis sometimes failed to preserve the spirit of the original tale, but at other times, the transformations shed a different light on the story, sometimes resulting in a meaning opposite to the covert meaning of the original text.

Greek, Roman and German myths pervaded the German fairy tales and were often clothed in Christian symbolism. Alternatively, allusions from Christian culture were inserted into the folktales, and in some cases the relationship to the myths and allusions were made through breaking conventions. The adaptors into Hebrew during the age of national revival replaced Christian myths and symbolism with Jewish symbolism, which, in many cases, was connected with the status of the persecuted, the Jewish experience as victim in Europe, the process of Jewish national renaissance and redemption.

The a priori decision by the adaptors to spare the Jewish reader from the encounter with pagan or Christian figures led to attempts to find Jewish alternatives taken from Jewish sources at any price, even if the figures they found in Jewish culture were not exact parallels. To this end, they were willing to replace feminine protagonists with males, thus changing the essential conflict in the tale, resulting in a forced translation in many cases.

For example, Frishman transposes Maria, mother of Christ, in the story “Mary's Child”, with the prophet Elijah[8]. At the core of the tale in the proto-text stands the description of a mother-daughter conflict[9]. This is less fitting for a relationship between a father or godfather and his daughter, and the translation seems forced. But the choice is no accident, since in Jewish heritage Elijah symbolizes the forerunner to the Messiah, and the redemption of the Jewish people from the diaspora.


The adaptors considered it important point to avoid having their readers encounter details of current Christian practice and customs, and exhibit conformism more on this issue than as regards basic conceptions that differentiate Christianity from Judaism. Therefore, the church or the pig either did not appear in the Hebrew texts, but they did not change a scene in which spreading blood on a statue brings redemption,(KHM6) nor did they change the theme that confession itself leads to absolution from all sins (KHM3). Customs of daily life were perceived as stronger and more important to the society, and were preferred over beliefs and opinions.

For example, in the story of Snow White, when the stepmother eats the liver and lungs of a wild boar, the translation states that what she dined on was the liver and lung of a deer (Berman Solomon 1897)[10]. The implication of the change is that instead of the stepmother possessing the spirit of a monstrous wild boar, she receives the spirit of a pure animal, and the translation here is forced.

When European flora and fauna appear in the proto-text, which do not appear in Scripture, rather than use the scientific Latin name or the German original, the adaptors replaced these elements with plants or animals native to Eretz Yisrael or mentioned in Jewish sources. Sometimes the adaptors did not necessarily use the nearest parallels, but searched for an association between the object of the exchange and a Jewish cultural element associated with the theme of the story. Thus, the replacement drew attention to other emphases in the tale. In other cases, there was not necessarily any association at all between the European flora and fauna and the Biblical replacement, nor was there any plant or animal from Jewish culture with thematic parallels in the tale, thus demonstrating that the a priori decision on the literary adaptation was more important than the artistic precision of a literary translation.

For example, in the story of the Frog King, the Linden tree that grew near the well in the forest is replaced by Frishman by an oak tree[11], since the Linden does not appear In the bible, nor does it grow in Israel. The Linden is considered the tree of love  (perhaps because of its heart shaped leaves), it symbolizes grace and was the national symbol of Prussia. In contrast, the oak symbolizes justice. When the princess is seated under the linden tree, its significance for her is of married life from the perspective of romantic love alone. Replacing the linden with oak cancels that symbolism.

One of the goals of the adaptors, who had determined the norm in turning to children’s literature in general and to the Grimms’ fairy tales in particular, was to develop a wider public for Hebrew literature. To realize this objective, they acted on several fronts, as efficiently as modern publicists selling various products through integrated marketing strategies. In like manner, in addition to literary writing for the older target population, they understood that they must develop a children’s and youth audience in order to begin literary education at an early stage. They believed that the possibility of real change lay in the young people. Their goal was to educate young readers who would read the text with meaning and who would know how to bring it to fruition. The symbols hidden in the stories, primarily key symbols through which it is possible to decode concealed meaning, are universal symbols that lie at the foundation of western civilization and its culture[12]. The adaptors, who wanted to inculcate western values and cultures in the younger generation, to educate them to read literature, found it easy to begin with the German fairy tales, because their readers had grown up with their symbols and were familiar with them. They considered these fairy tales to be the infrastructure and the basis of literary understanding as well as the means for creating a literary common denominator. Their goal was to expose the young reader to belles lettres in order to develop the child’s imagination and arouse emotion along with the ability to decode symbols. During the subsequent stage, when readers would encounter these symbols in the original Hebrew literary creations of the Hebrew revival literature, they would not find them strange, and would read into them significance to realize the text.

Along with educating the readers to read with meaning, writers and adaptors had already disseminated the ideas of the Hebrew national revival in children’s literature through their unique way of retelling the tales. During the period in which Jewish society had neither radio nor television, tellers of tales served as one of the means of communication to transmit messages. Those who accomplished the Jewish national revival strove to reform the existing social order, to denounce the rule of religious institutions in the community and to bring about a cultural revolution. The literary adaptors used fairy tales containing these themes as educational tools because they had a boundless belief in education as a means of change. In addition, the adaptors believed that through the transmittal of covert messages concealed in the Hebrew versions of the tales, they could influence the younger generation, and through them, to influence the parents. Since the German fairy tales were addressed to children and their families, they suited the Hebrew adaptors in terms of the target audience.

The Hebrew revival writers used the fairy tales and implanted the ideas they wished to disseminate on a covert level. One of the common a priori decisions that all of the adaptors made was to change elements from the original text that had a Christian connotation. However, the writers also changed details that had no Christian context, but “Judaized” them as part of their desire to transmit the messages of the Jewish National Movement. A closer inspection of the Hebrew versions proves that the adaptors wove the messages into a coherent network and integrated their socio-political ideology into the educational system in an attempt to connect them in a way that would make sense. Together with the study of Bible, they read fairy tales in Hebrew interwoven with fragmentary phrases taken from the Bible, engaged burning issues of the day, and presented the problems that could be solved to their target audience. Since most of the fairy tales had a “happy end,” they held out the possibility of redemption instead of the protagonist’s failure and destruction. This aspect suited the writers and editors, since the tales reflect a unifying literature, which is compatible with literature promoting national belief.

Some of the ideas that the editors and writers wanted to get across and inculcate within their readers were already to be found in the German material, and some they implanted in the form of allusions to the story of the Exodus from Egypt, through which they could hint at the unconscious parallel between the Desert Generation who wandered in the desert and their children, who settled the Land of Canaan, and between the generation of the Tehiya, the Jewish national revival, and the target audience who had to get out of Europe and come to the Land, to establish the National Homeland there.

For example: The Water-Nymph (KHM79 (was compared to Pharaoh[13], and the children who escape from her become the children of Israel (=the Jewish people), who have left Egypt (=the diaspora) and conquered the land of Israel (Bialik 1923).

In addition, since the movers of Jewish nationalism preached in a value-laden language, they used the retelling of the fairy tales to transmit the humanist values that suited them, such as the need for metamorphosis, personal responsibility, determination, persistence towards the goal, productive diligence and orderliness along with a humble attitude and making do with very little.

The principle of selection by the literary adaptors shows that they selected for adaptation those stories that contained the model of the victim persecuted by the environment who finally succeeds in breaking the cycle of persecution and becoming free. The researcher is of the opinion that from the outset, the literary structure of the victim who turns the tables on the persecutor suited the adaptors, and that their audience of readers easily identified with the heroes. At the same time, the model of persecution also was compatible with the Zionist ethos, utilized by the people who worked for the Jewish National movement in order to promote their goals.[14]

Some of the themes dealt with and discuss are the same themes used by the Hebrew revival in literature for adults, since they suited the world-view of the authors. These themes reflected the writers’ inner struggles and expressed the neuroses of their generation. For example, the possibility of “late return,” or the belief in “tikun,” or repair of fault. The fairy tales transmitted a model according to which the older generation was fossilized, and did not know what was good for the younger generation. Only the youngsters could repair what the older generation had twisted, and bring about the redemption. Change in the social structure, and a denunciation of the social status quo, the existing power structure would have to go, to be replaced by a more just, humanistic order.

The theme of destiny, expressed by the pair of lovers who are destined to be with each other, with the accompanying loyalty, refusal to break one’s oath, and the price that the young lovers are prepared to pay for their faithfulness, are all suited to the Zionist theme. However, while the canonical literature for adults sheds doubt on the possible success of such goals, often dooming them to failure, the fairy tales believe in their success.

There were additional messages concealed in the proto-text and which were suited to their ideological world-view and their social goals: (a) An outlook that educates people to willingness to self-sacrifice and considers this sacrifice as one of its highest ideals.  (b) The older generation is operating with outdated ideals and does not know what is best for the younger generation, who are the only ones who can repair the situation and bring about redemption. (c) An approach that negates the desire to break off the connection to the tradition of the past and makes success of the task conditional on, among others, the link to ancient roots. (d) The victim fights the attacker in non-conventional ways, but with great determination destroys the forces of evil, thus breaking through to the path of rebirth like the legendary Phoenix. (e) Presentation of the figure of a more independent young woman, unwilling to accept society’s dictates, but who initiates a change in her own status. Because the thinkers of the Zionist movement assigned a major role to women in the national revolution within the Jewish people, they envisioned an independent woman, with initiative, who would come and help build the Land and educate the “new Hebrew child.” This is why they perceived the image of the fairy tale heroine as suitable to the new status of woman in the Zionist vision.

For example: In the Tehiyah generation the editors translated into Hebrew only the German version of the Cinderella story, and not the French  version. In the German version the heroine is an initiating character, and she bursts forth from the circle of enslavement by force of her special powers. In comparison, Perrault's version[15] (the French version) has her as a passive, submissive character, and it is the fairy godmother who brings about the changes in her life and social standing. The German view matches the ideological perception of the creators of the Zionist Movement, who maintained that the Jewish community needs to come to Israel and take the initiative on order to break the circle of bondage, instead of waiting around for the Messiah to appear and do it for  them. After the establishment of the state, Hebrew translations were primarily  based on Perrault's  version.  (g) The aesthetic ideal of great admiration for the sensual and the beautiful, found in so many fairy tales, suited the world-view of the literary adaptors and their attempt to place aesthetics as an important value in the formation of human identity. At the same time, external beauty symbolized the person’s inner beauty, emphasizing the break with Jewish tradition that considered admiration of beauty to be an aspect of “Hellenism.

In like manner, the secular messianism of the fairy tales also fit the goals of the adaptors during the Hebrew cultural rebirth. In the hero story model, the tale ends with the redemption or liberation of the hero, due to his unique character, responses to events and his quest. Zionism strove towards concrete realization of the vision: the Messiah as perceived in Jewish tradition needed to be replaced by people who were willing to go on the quest: to journey to the Promised Land and build a state there.

The messages and the national interpretation were no less important than artistic precision for the adaptors. They strove to emphasize the stance that held that one must initiate action and create the metamorphosis that would bring about a national renascence, instead of the passivity of traditional rabbinic Judaism.

In addition, the adaptors connected the tales to a single literary environment. They tended to give the fairy tale heroes the names from heroes of Hebrew writers and poets, thus bringing into the text one author’s relations with another within the same cultural circle. Thus they “promoted” each others’ writings, making the new Hebrew literature into their world of referents making Hebrew literature the theme. The intercultural connection directed the covert messages to their target audience, all within the cultural sphere of the revival of Hebrew culture, and in this way they placed on the public agenda for discussion the literature by “Ramhal,”[16] “Michal,”[17] "Mapu"[18] and others on the one hand, and the Zionist-oriented Hebrew revival literature on the other hand. The resulting literary dialogue began there and continued for many years later.

The symbolism taken from German fairy tales infiltrated the new Hebrew literature, thus illuminating the text differently. When the stories were edited into Hebrew in the Age of National Rebirth, the adaptors linked their new versions to the new Hebrew works, thus providing a bi-directional illumination between the German fairy tales, Hebrew canonical literature and the Hebrew version of the fairy tale.

The Brothers Grimm’s collection inspired other individuals in different countries to collect their traditional folktales. Therefore, it was natural that those who were bringing about the Jewish national revival also began to collect their folktales. However, the Jewish folktales of Eastern Europe were in Yiddish, not in Hebrew, and the revival of the Hebrew language was a central component in the rebirth of Zionism as a national movement for statehood. Therefore, they could not turn to the Yiddish folktales, while they had no Hebrew folktales. Hebrew of the time was the written language of the traditional sources, of Holy Scripture. On the surface, adaptors could translate the Yiddish folktales, rewrite them for children and edit them, and David Frishman, considering his wide-ranging literary knowledge, was the ideal candidate for such an enterprise, as he himself wrote in Yiddish. But Frishman called Yiddish “jargon,” showing scorn for the language, which he felt was inferior to Hebrew or German. However, they used the solution of substitution of concepts suited to the Jewish readers instead of the Christian motifs in the stories that were displayed in the Yiddish folktales with which they were all familiar. In the generation of the national renascence, the Grimm fairy tales were already considered classic literature for children, and it was reasonable to assume that the adaptors considered the German folktales as having higher artistic value and more suitable for children than the Yiddish language folktales. Thus they were trapped in the “myth” that the Grimm brothers published the material as handed down to them and through tradition.

Frishman wanted to change the Diaspora Jewish character through the folktales, and re-shape the “new Jew,” with an “extra soul.” He hoped that the literature that contained, as he described, “lyrical spirit and sweet song and pleasant innocence”[19] would have some effect on the readers, especially on the young people. Frishman held that the synthesis between the German folktales, with their “lyrical spirit and innocence of childhood” and the Biblical Jewish heritage, was perhaps the only chance to bring about the longed-for change in the Jewish soul that had been habituated to Talmudic casuistry. He hoped that the encounter with art, and with stories, whose power, according to him, lay entirely in imagination, would lead to mental and psychological change. That is why he could not go to the Yiddish folktales, since, according to this perception, they would reflect the spirit of the Diaspora Jew, so he turned to the German folk tales because he found in them both the “lyrical spirit and the innocence of childhood” that were his ideal.

The question arises as to whether the adaptors were aware of everything that arose from the processed text in the wake of the changes that they made. Despite the fact that I sometimes used categorical terms and claimed that the adaptors implanted the allusions, that they wanted to transmit specific messages, it is possible that although they used this norm – there is no argument on this point – that not all were conscious of the results and the possible interpretations. A comparison between the adaptations of the stories in the corpus and the proto-text and the sources used by the major adaptors, demonstrates that the substitutions that facilitate a national interpretation are not to be found in the German sources, or in the Russian translations, but were intentionally made by the Hebrew adaptors. The a priori decision to filter the German material through the prism of Hebrew culture in general, and to embed fragments with set associations from Jewish sources in particular, created an intercultural dialogue and opened the way for interpretations. This is because the Jewish sources were an immanent part of the cultural universe of the adaptors, and formed an integral part of the childhood atmosphere in which they were raised. It may very well be that at times these fragments entered the text intuitively. It is reasonable to assume that the adaptors embedded at least some of their allusions in an associative manner, or that the situation in the fairy tale reminded them of situations from Jewish sources, or that these associations arose due to linguistic phrasing. Therefore, it is possible that the adaptors were not always aware of the interpretations that were opened up with the creation of this synthesis. Furthermore, the ideas of the Jewish National Revival constituted an important foundation for their opinions and world-views, and it was important to them to imbue others with these ideas. Therefore, even if the messages were not always transmitted consciously, they penetrated the text covertly, and, even if not all of the adaptors intended to do so, or if they were not consciously aware of the interpretations that opened up in their adaptations, the norm and the technique led to these messages and goals, that were compatible with the Jewish national revival movement and the advancement of its ideas.



[1] Rölleke Heinz. The oldest collection of Fairy Tales by the Brothers Grimm- A Synopsis of the Handwritten original Version of 1810 and the first edition of 1812 ( Die älteste Märchensammlung der Brüder Grimm –  Synopse der Handschriftlichen  Urfassung von 1810  und der erstdrucke von 1812), Genève: Collogny  1975. Print.

    Ellis John M. One Fairy Story Too Many; The Brother Grimm and Their Tales, London & Chicago: Uni. of Chicago. 1983. Print.                                                                         


[2]  Berman Solomon. "The True Bride"(Hackala Hamitit KHM186) Warsaw: Toushiya. 1897. Print.

Ofek, Uriel. “Grimm Jacob Ludwig. Grimm Wilhelm Karl”, Ofek Lexicon for Children's Literature,(Lexicon Ofek Lsafrut Yeladim) Tel Aviv: Zmora-Bitan, 1985. Print

[3] Ahad Ha'am: One of the leading thinkers of Zionism, one of the forefront of those to formulate secular-nationalist Jewish identity.

[4] Bialik: Poet laureate, the leading poet of “Hatehiyah” (The revival) generation


[5]  A. Berman Solomon. Fairy Tales for Children (Sichot Liyeladim)Warsaw: Toushiya 1897-1912.

  1. Frishman David. Fairy Tales  – The Brothers Grimm (Sichot – Haachim Grimm). Odessa: Moriah 1917-1919.
  2. Spivak Yitzak. The Golden Goose.(Avaz Hazahav) Odessa: Kineret 1918.
  3. Krupnik Aharon The Grimm's Fairy Tales (Maasiyot Haachim Grimm) . Berlin: Menora 1921.
  4. Lewin Nathan. The Grimm's Fairy Tales (Maasiyot Haachim  Grimm) Vilna: Rosental  1922.
  5. Bialik Haim Nahman). Ten Fairy Tales for Children (Esser Sichot Liyladim) Berlin: Ofir 1923.
  6. Ben-Eliezer Moses. Toys – A Children's Library (Zaazouim- Sifriya Liyladim)Warsaw: Sifrut 1924

[6] Gordon, Yehudah Leib. “My sister Ruhama”(Achoty Rouchama) , Yehudah Leib Gordon Complete Works.(Kol Kitvey Yalag) Tel Aviv: Dvir. Vol II p. 31, 1956 .[1882] Print.

[7] Ben Eliezer, Moshe. “Lily among the Thorns(Shoshana bein Hachochim), Toys – A Children's Library(Zaazouim- Sifriya Liyladim) . Warsaw: literature, 1924. Print.

[8] Frishman, David. “Elijah the Prophet” Fairy Tales  – The Brothers Grimm (Sichot – Haachim Grimm). Odessa: Moriah 1917, 12-19. Print.

[9] Scherf Walter ." Marienkind” , Das Märchenlexikon, , München: C. H. Beck ,1995.  pp. 851.  Band 2.

[10]  Berman Solomon. Snow White ( Livnat Sheleg) Warsaw: Toushiya 1897. Print.

[11] Frishman David." Frog King"(Melech Zfardea) Fairy Tales  – The Brothers Grimm (Sichot – Haachim Grimm). Odessa: Moriah 1917 pp. 1. Print.

[12] Tatar Maria. The Hard Facts of the Grimm’s Fairy Tales, New-Jersey:    Princton Uni. Press. 1987 Pp.75-80. Print.

[13] Bialik Haim Nahman)." The Water-Nymph" (Bat Hamaim) Ten Fairy Tales for Children (Esser Sichot Liyladim) Berlin: Ofir 1923. Print.

[14] In contrast to the principle of corpus adapters, we find varied choice principles by publishers and translators for partial collections of Grimm's Fairy Tales. Some examples: a. Tales of animals, b. Tales of dwarves and robbers, c. Tales to do with food and drink, d. Tales related to trees and flowers, e. Tales of the rich and the poor, f. Tales related to hard labour, g. Tales involving gold and silver, h. Tales of the Forest, I. Tales of death, j. Tales of soldiers, k. Tales of princes and princesses, l. Tales of heaven and hell, m. Tales of good and bad, n. Tales of Kings, o. Erotic Tales, p. Romantic Tales, q. Tales of travel and journeys, and more.

[15] Perrault Charles. "Cinderella" (Cendrillon) Tales of Mother Goose (Les Contes de ma Mere l' Oie) Paris: Gallimard (1931) [1697]. Print.

[16]  Ramhal –Acronym for Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, a well known 18th century Rabbi, Kabbalist and poet, who had great influence on Jewish movements from his lifetime to the present day

[17] Micha”l – One of the great poets of the Jewish “Haskalah” (enlightenment) movement, 1828-1852.

[18]  Mapu, Avraham –  Hebrew novelist of the “Haskalah” (enlightenment) movement. His novels later served as a basis for the Zionist movement. His was the first novel in the Hebrew language.

[19] Frishman, David. “Foreword”, (Hakdamah). Anderson Tales and Stories in Hebrew, (Agadot ve Sipurim Shel Andersen be ivrit) Vilnius: Yeshurun, 1896. Print.



  • Ben-Eliezer Toys – A Children's Library (Zaazouim- Sifriya Liyladim)Warsaw: Sifrut 1924.
  • Berman Solomon. Fairy Tales for Children (Sichot Liyeladim)Warsaw: Toushiya 1897-1912.
  • Bialik Haim Nahman). Ten Fairy Tales for Children (Esser Sichot Liyladim) Berlin: Ofir 1923.
  • Ellis John M. One Fairy Story Too Many; The Brother Grimm and Their Tales, London & Chicago: Uni. of Chicago. 1983. Print.
  • Frishman, David. Anderson Tales and Stories in Hebrew, (Agadot ve Sipurim Shel Andersen be ivrit) Vilnius: Yeshurun, 1896. Print.


  • Frishman David. Fairy Tales  – The Brothers Grimm (Sichot – Haachim Grimm). Odessa: Moriah 1917-1919.
  • Gordon, Yehudah Leib. “My sister Ruhama”(Achoty Rouchama) , Yehudah Leib Gordon Complete Works.(Kol Kitvey Yalag) Tel Aviv: Dvir. 1956 .[1882] Print.
  • Krupnik Aharon The Grimm's Fairy Tales (Maasiyot Haachim Grimm) . Berlin: Menora 1921.
  • Lebensohn, Micha Yosef. “Solomon and Ecclesiastes” (Shlomo ve Kohelet) Songs of Zion's daughter (Shirey bat Zion), Tel Aviv: Dvir (1942) [1851].
  • Lewin Nathan. The Grimm's Fairy Tales (Maasiyot Haachim  Grimm) Vilna: Rosental
  • Luzzatto, Moshe Chaim. A Tower of Strength (Migdal Oz), Leipzig: Nayes 1837. Print.
  • Mapu, Avraham. The love of Zion (Ahavat Zion).Vilnius: R’em 1853. Print.


  • Ofek, Uriel. Ofek Lexicon for Children's Literature,(Lexicon Ofek Lsafrut Yeladim) Tel Aviv: Zmora-Bitan, 1985. Print
  • Perrault Charles. Tales of Mother Goose (Les Contes de ma Mere l' Oie) Paris: Gallimard (1931) [1697]. Print.


  • Rölleke Heinz. The oldest collection of Fairy Tales by the Brothers Grimm- A Synopsis of the Handwritten original Version of 1810 and the first edition of 1812 ( Die älteste Märchensammlung der Brüder Grimm – Synopse der Handschriftlichen  Urfassung von 1810  und der erstdrucke von 1812), Genève: Collogny  Print.
  • Scherf Walter ." Marienkind” , Das Märchenlexikon, , München: C. H. Beck ,1995.
  • Spivak Yitzak. The Golden Goose.(Avaz Hazahav) Odessa: Kineret 1918.
  • Tatar Maria. The Hard Facts of the Grimm’s Fairy Tales, New-Jersey: Princton Uni. Press. 1987