The Responsa of the Babylonian Geonim as a Source of Jewish History

THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM AS A SOURCE OF JEWISH HISTORY By JACOB MANN, Jews' College, London. INTRODUCTION...

Author: Jacob Mann

52 downloads 768 Views 12MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

THE

RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM AS A SOURCE OF JEWISH HISTORY By JACOB MANN, Jews' College, London. INTRODUCTION.1

THE period of the Babylonian Geonim, extending over four centuries and a half of great importance for the history of the Jews, runs in a parallel line with the rise of the new religion of IslAm and the wonderful political ascendancy of the Arabs. In the time of the earliest Geonim falls the Hegira of Muhammed (622 C. E.), and during the whole of the Gaonic period (till about io50 C. E), the fate of the greater part of the Jews was coupled with the vicissitudes of the Moslem Empire. We have only to recall to memory the importance of such Jewish communities as Bagdad and Wasit, Kufa and Basrah, Fustat and Cairo, Kairowan and 1

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS n1, = 'Responsen der Geonini', ed. Harkavy, in Studien undMitteilungen, vol. 4, Berlin, 1887. v = hifnln i tI, Vienna, ed. Coronel. = 5~531K~11n:)wf,Lyck, 1864, ed. Musafia. nl~ rl"I , wnnn ln'JZIVI,Mantua (re-edited by Rabbinovitz, Vilna, i885).

4Imw , ed. Miiller, in the periodical 7$rin i?-, vols. min IV and V (also in a separate reprint). ed. Cassel. Berlin, i848. 33 = rrnnnlp nl1lw nalm, D"ll - WrINWI In 11i1MOD 111Zs'l, ed. MOiller,Cracow, i893. ~'M= o'1?I D'lnn WI,ril 'JIVI', ed. Wolfensohn, Jerusalem. j 11pTh -n =31Y W~b~INr1'31 , ed. Modai, Salonica. f ed. Fischl, Leipzig, i858. ri"V = r'IlZI s' DV Vb lr1ln'2V, = v r PartsI and II, ed. Horowitz, ?rVtIln mnairv .)/,V~ll [See over. Frankfort, i88i. VOL. VII. Hh 457

-01,1==:vn

H,

458

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

Fez, in order to realize the close connexion between the history of the Arabs with that of the Jewry of that period; all these cities were foundedby the Arabs during the time of their wonderfulterritorialexpansion. What the landing of the Arabs in Spain (711 c.E.) meant both for the Jews of

that country and for Jewry at large is well known. The internalhistory of the Jews of that period is characterized by the spread and the general acceptance of Rabbinic Judaism as embodied in the BabylonianTalmud and by the opposition it was subjected to on the part of the sectarians in Israel, especially the Karaites. The greater part of our knowledge, scanty and fragmentary as it is, about the life of the Jews of that period,is derived from the Gaonic responsa. These letters of reply which the Geonim, as the recognizedleaders of Jewry, sent to their correspondentsall over the diaspora, comprise the greater part of the literaryactivity of the Geonim; in other literary works this period was far from being prolific, and still less productivein historical books. It should be kept in mind that even in the chronology of the period,from the Geon. I = Geonica II, containing 'iRK ntSl In DInil mIInlrl mn5w ed. Ginzberg, New York, I909. '1Y1YDZ, JQR. = Jewish QuarterlyReview. R.J. = Revue des AtudesJuives. Monatsschrift=Monatsschrftfur Geschichteund Wissenschaftdes Judentums. Einleit. - Einleitung in die Responsen der Babylonischen Geonen,by Dr. Joel Mfiller, Berlin, x89r. ZfHB. = Zeitschriftfir tHebraischeBibliographie. Gr. V = Graetz, GeschichtederJuden, vol. V, fourth edition, 1909. Sherira's Letteris quoted according to Neubauer's MediaevalJewish Chronicles, vol. I (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, vol. I, part iv, i887). The dates of the Geonim are given according to the 'Synchronistic List of the Geonim of Sura and Pumbedita' by Epstein and Bacher in the Jewish Encclopedia, sub ' Gaon'.

RESPONSA

OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM-MANN

459

time of the last Amoraim till the end of the Gaonate,we would not find our way were it not for such a responsum known as the Letter of Sherira.2 In fact, these responsa, as far as they are extant, are a real treasure-trovefor the knowledge of the life of the Jews of that period,especially in such points where the informationto be obtainedfrom external sources entirely fails. The responsa furnish in particularample materialfor our knowledgeof the internal life of the Jews: their relations to the authorities and to their non-Jewish neighbours,their economic position,their communal organization,and their standard of culture and morality. All this materialhas not yet been made use of sufficiently; the Jewish history of that period was rather treated as a collection of biographies of the prominent spiritualand communalleaders. Important as this aspect of historical treatment is, the life of the people as a whole is of sufficient importance to be investigatedand understood. In this treatise therefore the latter course of historicalinvestigationwill chiefly be followed. In the following pages the responsa of the Babylonian Geonim only are considered,so that the general results obtained can hardly claim to be exhaustive and complete. In using the responsa for the purpose of reconstructing history great care has to be exercised. These responsa, when sent by the heads of the two great Babylonian Academies,had formalheadingsand conclusions,3according 2 Likewise the report of Nathan the Babylonian about the installation exilarch (in Neubauer, Med. Jew. Chronicles, II=Neub. II, 83-5) is the of quoted by Ibn Verga in his ShebetJehuda, No. 42, as found in 'the responsa of early Geonim (1iWStl WMZ) 1nlr113). 3 Some concluding phrases of the responsa are similar to those of the

Muhammedan FetwAs, see Goldziher, ZDMG., LIII, 645-52 and Mtiller, Vienna OrientalJournal, XIV, I71.

Hh

460

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

to the fashion of that age, in which the dates of composition as well as the names of the correspondents and the positions they held in their communities were mentioned. Unfortunately in most responsa at our disposal these formalities were not preserved, The several collectors of these responsa were chiefly anxious about the preservation of the Halakic decisions of the Geonim, and everything else was regarded as superfluous and was accordingly omitted. For the same sake of brevity the letters of question which the correspondents addressed to the Geonim are in most cases either abridged or not extant.4 Thus it results that in many cases the names of the Geonim are not mentioned at all, or there are differences in the various collections as regards the authors of the responsa, especially when they deal with similar cases. In a still less degree have the names of the correspondents, their places of residence, and the dates of composition been preserved. As a result, it is often very difficult to fix the place and the time of an event or custom we learn from the responsa. Similarly only on rare occasions are the names of the parties concerned given in the responsa. The men are called as a rule by the names of the twelve tribes in the order given in the Pentateuch, e.g. Reuben, Simeon, &c., or they assume other Biblical names; whereas the women are named after Jacob's wives, Leah, Rachel, &c. (cp. e. g. Likewise it is difficult to ascertain the p"', No. 132). amounts of money invested in partnerships or in other business transactions. When copying the responsa, the ' W?v'DnnNvwl 4Cp. e.g. n"1, No. I53: ~n nn: itpom th I'W was made in the where reference 5 #l nW"I, complete form of ^%1Y 1"'sl question to an historic event concerning the Jews, as the answer of the Rabbi or Gaon shows.

RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM-MANN

46I

scribes usually used the Talmudic expressions: Ioo Minae (rnn r o)or 100 denarii (ip"r n ,n, cp. e.g. '"n, No. 49). is used for any country to be The expression W, nmrDm reached by sea from the place of the correspondent.5 As regards such responsa, the place of destination of which is unknown, it may be argued that they were sent For the to communities distant from the academies. nearer communities there was no need for written answers; the scholars and the disciples that visited the two Academies during the large gatherings in the Kallah-months,6 hailing from the various communities around the academies, brought with them theoretical as well as practical questions and received the required answers orally from the Geonim. Only the distant communities in Persia, and especially those outside Babylon, sent written questions, for which written answers were required. Thus there actually exist responsa to the distant community of Basrah at the Persian Gulf, as will be shown later. R. Hai Gaon in a responsum to Kairowan (in Or Zarua, II, ? 432, p. 177) mentions that the Halakhas of R. Yehudai Geon were known in Babylon only a hundred years after his death, when Jewish captives from Christian countries brought them to Babylon (cp. p. 21, and also EppenEpstein on the Halakot Gedolot ( P"n), stein, Monatsschrift, 19II, 732, note 1). This shows that 5 Cp. also the interesting remarksby the correspondent in twD r"i " n',1 No. II4 (cited in 'l?nnl rT:, I, 5 ff.), about the collections of Gaonic

i-m n%m mnimnw lznrin DiypKm1 n5ry Responsa:t:'in?'M3M 5y DW:MW l^D ,n1 nt-l rto nl:r nt 'ID;n tIMpTOtn nup IDP;t n In nin Dnnmnvrn3 rsv bnmn,nln m3,1n'P n6t nbrs:i K pIn nnnx won vvwnI n il rn ?nnb nnlnltn :rnKnnI . 6 Cp. the description in the report of Nathan the Babylonian (in Neub., S :=5:n See also n"., No. 312: ,I1i 1 n Sbnn 531 II, 87-8).

...3s

,s:n wn= jtlK=

"i nDns '=3nn nIsW

1hi ,i:m.

THE JEWISH

462

QUARTERLY REVIEW

these decisions of R. Yehudai were originally sent to congregations abroad. We find further R. Hai having no knowledge of responsa of his predecessors which his correspondents from foreign countries quote (see n"l Nos. 80, 26o, 376, and 383). All this proves that most of the extant responsa were sent to communities distant from the academies. (About the various collections of the responsa 7 see Muller, Einleit., chs. 1-3.)

I.

THE

JEWRIES

OF TIE

DIASPORA

TIONS WITH THE BABYLONIAN

AND THEIR RELAGEONIM.

The influence of the Geonim extended over a wide field, Babylon, Asia Minor, the countries around the Mediterranean,including even France and Germany, are all representedin the great numberof responsathe Geonim sent to their correspondentsall over the Diaspora. From these letters of the Geonimwe learn either of the existence of Jewish communitiesin the above countries,or we obtain new informationabout those that are alreadyknown from other sources. There convergedat Sura and Pumbedita,as 7 Most of the responsa contained in the collection which forms a part of Brit. Mus. Add. 26,977 (see Margoliouth, Catalogue, II, No. 566, and cp. Marx, ZfHB., XIII, 172) are the same as found in S'#, though the order is somewhat different.-Of more interest is Brit. Mus. Add. 27,I8r (see Margoliouth, 1. c., No. 565) containing extensive extracts from Juda Albarceloni's s'll ' 3!D, a part of which formed 1n)'l li 'D from which considerable extracts are also to be found in the MS.; Halberstam's edition of ;lp '12 nl'DPI'W t-' (x898), from Bodl. 890o, should be compared with these extracts. As is the case with the other writings of Barceloni, the Gaonic responsa as well as those of Alfasi have been fully cited in this tI'nl 'D. Several of these responsa are not to be found in the other collections.


463

it were, connecting links from all the various communities, which transmittedon the one hand instructionand spiritual guidance from both those centres of Jewish learning,and recordedon the other hand the conditions of Jewry in the countriesof its dispersion. At the beginning of the Gaonic period the influence of the Geonim probably extended only as far as Babylon. This fact will account for the very small numberof responsawe possess from the earlier Geonim. Only with the growth of the Arabianexpansion to the north and east of Arabia, and especiallyto the west reachingto Spain,and occasionallyeven to southernFrance and southern Italy, the sphere of activity of the Geonim widened, and the connexions of the academies with the outside communities increased. In the time of R. Hai (998-1038),the last of the Geonim,this intercoursereached its maximum. We shall now consider in detail the relations of each countrywith the Geonim. i. Irck (Babylon,).Irak was the most importantcentre of Jewry during the Amoraic times and large numbers of Jews must have lived there. This position of importance Irak retained throughout the Gaonic period. It was only towardsthe close of the Gaonatethat the centreof gravitation was transferredto Spain and otherEuropeancountries. During the time of the Amoraim till the beginningof the Gaonic period, the bulk of the Jews of Irak must have lived aroundNisibis, Nehardea,Mehusa,Sura, and Pumbedita. Already at the beginning of the third century, when Rab came to Sura, many Jews lived in that district.8 Of the large Jewish communities at Nisibis and Nehardeawe learn already from Josephus(Ant., XVIII, 91, 8 See Sherira, Letter,29, top: M11'irl nnln on w-ri wN: 5)VB &DntDrnn ..l . nn;

n0 sin &nD. Km

'sl:i

p'IpnwrIRn

464


and 99, ? 379). Several other Jewish com?? 31I-I2 munities in Babylon are referred to in the writings of the Geonim. Most of them are known already from references in the Babylonian Talmud. The references, however, that are to be found in the Gaonic literature, show us that these communities continued their existence for several centuries later. The Gaon of Pumbedita in 589 was R. Hanan of Iskiya, which place is perhaps identical with Sekia on the eastern bank of the Euphrates (see Briill, Jahlrbiiclher, II, 54, note 80). The community of Nehar Pekod was represented at the Academy of Sura by three Geonim, viz. R. Haninah in 689, R. Jacob in 715, and Mar R. Mari ha-Cohen in 751. The Gaon of Pumbedita after 689, R. Hiyya, hailed from the province of Messene (we'), near the Persian Gulf. R. Ahai, the well-known author of the Sheeltolh, was from Shabha. The community of Naresh had the honour of having one of its sons, R. Nehilai, attain the dignity of Gaon of Sura (697). The Gaon of Pumbedita in 798 hailed from Shilha (4nSw; about this place see Geon. I, 41, note i). From a place called Vntq3, near Bagdad, came R. Isaiah, the Gaon of Pumbedita in 796 (Letter, p. 37, 1. I : tn'in

JVpn'n&na *'lS_).

The last two centuries of the Persian rule in Babylon were for the Jews centuries of suffering and persecution for their religion, as we learn from the scanty information Sherira gives in his Letter (p. 35, top, and p. 33, bottom; Gr., V4, 3-I6). Some details as to the dealings of the Magians are to be obtained from nr", Nos. 297-8. There used to be a weekly tax upon every household to contribute wood for the fire-temples, and Jews had to contribute as well. Further, on a certain night, called ns, the Magians used to exact from every house candles for illuminating


465

their temples. With the advent of the Arabs (637-43 c. E.), the lot of the Jews was changed for the better, and the religious persecutions ceased. Peroz-Shabur, or Anbar,9 must have been then an important Jewish centre. Ali, the fourth Caliph, on his coming to Ir&k in 655, was received near Per6z-Shabur by the Gaon R. Isaac at the head of a procession of ninety thousand Jews (Sherira in his Letter, 35, note I6, according to one reading). The town of Bagdad, however, founded by al-Mansur in 762, but not finished till some years later, soon became the principal centre for the Jews of Irak. A vivid picture of the enormous trade that flourished there is drawn by Kremer, Culturgeschichte des Orients, in the chapter headed ' Die Stadt des Heils' (vol. II, C. 2; see also Weil, Geschichte der Kalifen, II, 76-7, and Aug. Miller, Der Islam im Morglnu. Abendland, I, 471 ff.). Jews settled in Bagdad soon after its foundation. Graetz (V4, 179) refers to the fact that R. Natroi, the successor of R. Samuel (748) to the dignity of Gaon of Pumbedita, was from Bagdad, as Sherira reports in his Letter (p. 35, bottom: 3 Nminn ;n1 mn 'l in^M). But it is hardly possible that the Bagdad founded by Mansur is here referred to. R. Natroi's successor, R. Dodai, became Gaon already in 761, i. e. before the foundation of Bagdad! The Gaon R. Natroi must have therefore come from the town called Bagdad that existed in that neighbourhood before the coming of the Arabs (see Berliner, Beitriige zur Geographiie i. Ethznographie Babyloniens, p. 25). From other references, however, we learn of the growth of the Jewish community in the Bagdad of Mansur which soon outstripped its other namesake both in fame and greatness. About 814-I6 the Jewish community there 9 About Anbar, see Gr., V4, 444, n. I.

466


was already so important that the two rival Geonim of Pumbedita met there for the Kallah (ni) meeting of the Academy (Sherira, Letter, 38, 1. 5 ff.). Probably they held this gathering in the presence of the Exilarch, who must have had his residence in Bagdad, the seat of the central government of the empire since the accession of the Abbasides (761). As the political head of the Jews, the Exilarch had often to confer with the central government at the court of the Caliph (see Nathan's report in Neub. II, 84, bottom, and 85, top). When Jews had grievances against the authorities, they would turn to the Exilarch for intervention by the central authorities on their behalf. That the Exilarchs Ukba and David b. Zakkai lived in Bagdad we learn from Nathan's report (Neub. II, 78 ff.), where i:: seems to be identical with Bagdad (so also Gr. V4, 454, note 2). Al-Kasr, a suburb of Bagdad, was the birthplace of David b. Zakkai (Nathan, ibid., 79, cp. Ginzberg, Geon., I, 40, note 3). There lived also in Bagdad Jewish magnates of great influence at the Caliph's court. In the quarrels between Ukba and Cohen-Zedek, as well as between David b. Zakkai and Saadya, we see these magnates exerting their influence in favour of the one side or the other (see Nathan's report, ibid. II, 78 ff.). A somewhat legendary account of the influence of the Jewish magnate Netirah has been edited by Harkavy in Berliner's Festschrift, Hebrew part, 35 ff. Netirah's sons, Sahl and Isaac, were also both prominent men at the Caliph's court. After the death of David b. Zakkai, it seems that these magnates continued the practice of the Exilarch in intervening at the Caliph's court on behalf of the Jews. Thus in a responsum by some Rabbi the leaders of the community, to whom this responsum is

RESPONSA


467

addressed, are requested to inform the Rabbi of their petitions and requests, who in his turn would instruct the influential Jews of Bagdad to intervene on their behalf with the central authorities (Geon., II, 87: i: pr

tN 4z Dr;Mi

. . .'15i

114ms b1P

w

inrw I "^nK M

nn o D:1r

-n

D nlz5nn

bz3, nw

nWK

1

nn

tWi

-IV

wnw

I,.

. 1N

C^Dr m 1^ i,nnnta 1 ;19DW I. tr p Geon., I, 207, top, and II, 420.) Ginzberg (p. 48) (Cp. assumes that the author of the responsum was a Palestinian. This is not clear from the fragment; nor is it certain that it constitutes a part of a responsum. It may perhaps be a part of RK=al'1!1N n '1:l jP I 1p: , who in his turn was the disciple of Yehudai Geon (cp. especially, Schechter, Hoffmann-Festschrift, Hebrew part, 262). As Ben Bebai's master was Yehudai's disciple, it is only natural that Yehudai should figure so prominently in Ben Bebai's lplD, as we find in the fragment in Geonica. It would be of interest to compare the handwriting of fragment Schechter with that of Geon. (T.-S. Loan 97). It should be added that T.-S. Io K, 9t also contains a colophon KNK'.. ^41=K K[Kz "nrmnl jIl Ip"Ea rVOL. VOL. VI. VII.

in

I Ii

THE JEWISH

474

QUARTERLY REVIEW

of sermons delivered on Sabbaths, it was inferred that there must have existed then Jewish communities in Palestine Likewise the pilgrim Willibald who (see Gr., V4, I79-80). visited Palestine in 765 writes,' ibi (Tiberiade) sunt multae ecclesiae et synagogae Iudaeorum' (quoted by Graetz, ibid., I1, 3). The responsum of R. Jehudai's contemporary, mentioned above, adds new information about the Palestinian Jewry of those times. There existed several communities in Palestine and in some of them, including Jerusalem, Babylonian Jews that settled there were in such considerable numbers, that they could enforce their will in matters concerning the ritual of the synagogue.'8 We learn further from rn`', No. 39, that Jews from Africa as well as from Babylon married women in Palestine and settled there. Probably these Babylonian Jews continued their connexions with the Geonim and their Academies. Among the countries that sent material support to the Babylonian academies Palestine is also included (Ibn Daud, n ed. Neubauer, p. 67: n-mw n"pn n? nD1O5mm noipl

Dm,DIKtpnIQI:nynn y'Ki 'm9DP:ynD'5m, ,nwnwmw

iw pin Yet only a few responsa are extant wherein it is expressly stated that they were sent to Palestine.l9 R. Hai

,rInyit). 18

Geon., II, 52, 11.20-24:

MnWn

S Y13fl1WV'I-'p /

nD1

i

-i5z n4nioInDI IN ,ni n Invy \t6:1:1 n 5:3 nWlnp 7D%),7n5yli1pWUpnpimnvl

tVw v:f)

51Q= nwl

1?! n rin nznwm

s ps< p^N5aa,na rKyW &'onK ("s

bn~Dl i.nN GDt.33

nJll:1'gnl:sUo :tW3

i!R

w1*

n:e,3 ,t< EIrnp.

19 On the other hand, cp. abpT '1T1i55 a (cited by Berliner, ZfHB.,

4 Iv, 149): il 'n n5n pmKt'-iny 3-i ib lpDn-p in1inswnSnNl ,nw -11n1 87bb 10 tnli< nK n4np nsKwi51-7U) ,JFSSW rpt ? KS1 21n. The well-known responsum in V"n, No. 93 (cf. J, No. 8, and a"n, No. 166 in the name of Hai) is headed in Or. 1054, fol. 87 a tln'D. (see Margoliouth, Catalogue, III, 509, col. a) 521=:'W' 'i r .. This can hardly be correct as in the responsum (in T"nand in 5&) it is ItiIn


475

mentions in n"', No. 64, a question that reached him from n 'the scholars of Jerusalem' (Dtrn':mnvw n:nn,nnn). It is difficult to ascertain who these scholars were and whether they held any official dignity. Thanks to the Genizah finds we know now a good deal about the academy founded in Jerusalem, the heads of which bore WVN(see now especially also the title of 1npVpI&n: PoznaAski, Babylon Geonim, &c., 8I ff.). But it is as yet very obscure what relations existed between the Babylonian Geonim and the Palestinian Academy. No clear case has so far been established that Sherira and Hai corresponded with the Palestinian Geonim. It is very doubtful whether the letter of Sherira and Hai to a la,2w wvo, dated I3th of Ab, I300 Sel. = 989 C.E., and containing the interesting l nm,2w w wt in1o wpz: nprn n,5 passage nnmn , ;v 5 nrw W '1i nlnnnm

n lS

ntrw'3p:

n::lt

was really sent to the

Palestinian Gaon, Joseph ha-Cohen, as Dr. Marmorstein, who published this letter from a MS. Adler in ZDMG,, LXVII, 630, maintains. It is rather strange that the 'ì without mentioning letter should end abruptly with Dom his priestly descent nor his official dignity. It is possible that iD1 'n' forms the beginning of the next item in the MS. Adler which thus requires further investigation.20 The mK5:1 nD3n. But the above expressly mentioned DWMl "J1 5-1 denote that it should be deleted. in which overlined is Or., may heading 20 After having examined this manuscript, I find my doubts about Marmorstein's identification fully confirmed. The fragment consists of two joined leaves in the same handwriting (detached in MS. Adler, No. 4009; a facsimile of leaf i a is, I understand, to appear in the forthcoming Catalogue of Mr. Adler's MSS. Collection). The first half of leaf I a covers the part of the letter by Sherira and Hai (to W"' nwr Ki1 ji). Removed from this stands in the middle of the line 9D0l it. Then follows on the next line a letter by Joseph ibn Abitur, covering the remainder of leaf i a and the following three pages. This letter is addressed to Samuel Ii

476

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

reading of the Gaon's letter in public need not refer to the custom prevailing in Palestine which mostly took place on Mount Olivet on Hoshana Rabba, as Poznadski, I.c., 85-6 thinks. We find in )"n, No. 37, the Gaon Aaron ha-Cohen (of Pumbedita, 943) writing to his correspondents: VniDNnrtn,nw,n 5w ;nlwnn I'-pN nipTn winp1ln On the other hand it appears from a letter of the Palestinian Gaon Solomon b. Jehuda (Saadyana II3=Y7QR., XIV, 483, 11.42-6) that in his time there arose friction between the Babylonian (i.e. Pumbedita) and Palestinian schools over their respective spheres of influence in Egypt (niprln mta nD

ntr i m= Nn n3

[nr] Inw ip

IMnrl niplm

nn

IDw

5i

ntn

,n1n=n~,n r,Nn ?Y v prnn,W,ev nvp[ vpnrD=an"tV,pnr 4=5 imn ,nll[: nx ranr1 NmnD, nS nrn). Anyhow, the existence of an Academy in Jerusalem since, at least, the middle of the tenth century would account for such a small number of responsa having been sent to Palestine by the last Pumbedita Geonim. What one would like to know is whether the Babylonian Jews residing in Palestine, whom we have seen above (p. 474) in considerable numbers already in the middle of the eighth century, continued throughout the centuries their connexions with the academies of their native country. Perhaps further Genizah finds will enlighten us concerning this point. ,,, n.

n~2i'n NWK b. Joseph Np0y Jil W KnI (cited by Marmorstein, . c., 637, n. i). As both letters are in the same handwriting, it is evident that they are only copies from the originals. The copyist thus placed FtD1i in front of Joseph's (ibn Abitur) letter, i. e. written by him! Hence the letter of Sherira and Hai was never addressed to Joseph (ha-Cohen, Gaon of Jerusalem). More probably it was sent either to Fustat or KaiThe remarks of rowan; in both places there existed schools (ill'B'). Poznafiski (Babylon. Geonim, 85-6), based on Marmorstein's publication, will have to be cancelled.


477

3. The most frequent intercourse, however, the Babylonian Academies had with the north-African communities and also with Spain. We shall begin with Egypt, the nearest North-African country on the way from Babylon to the Occident. The connexion between Babylon and Egypt became the more easy after the conquest of Egypt by the Arabs under 'Amr ibn al-'As in 639-42. This famous general founded Fustat and connected it with the Red Sea by repairing the neglected canal between the Nile and the Gulf of Suez (see Aug. Muller, ibid., I, 266). In a short time a very important Jewish community sprang up there. Already in 750 there existed in Fustat a Jewish community under the leadership of a Babylonian Jew, Abu-Ali Hasan of Bagdad (see YQR., XVII, 426-30). Many Jews from Babylon as well as from Palestine settled there, forming two separate communities, the so-called 0,:nnn, nvDD) 'synagogue of the Babylonians' (p"4pmnrKt, and the 'synagogue of the Palestinian Jews' (Ip,vs's, see especially Worman, YQR., XVIII, I-39; Bacher, ibid., 564, and Poznaiski, Ry., XLVIII, I57-60). In a fragment published by Goldziher, R.7., LV, 58, we read: nw 13 13nD1 nD331 nnD^WlnF, nDz: inp n1ilyn;l nvnp,n .,.., rnirnpi; nRnpn n:1 rn n'v nD:i1 r~,[n

w5n t\l ; 'n (see now also

It is only Shapira, Mdlanzges H. Derenbourg, 1J2-30). natural that the great number of Babylonian Jews in Fustat should have turned to the Babylonian academies for religious instruction. Yet only a few responsa of the Babylonian Geonim are expressly mentioned as having been sent to Egypt. We find chiefly the later Geonim, especially Sherira and Hai, maintaining some connexions with Egypt.21 In a letter from FustAt to Hai (cited by 21 Cp. '1", No. 290, beginning, probably by Sherira and Hai, see Einleit.,

THE JEWISH

478

QUARTERLY REVIEW

Worman, 1.c., Ia) it is mentioned that the synagogue of the Babylonians in FustAt was named after the Pum. e n1:w W'ti bedita Academy (rnrnpn uIK uD i,, nS. rw In:a, at

5I

The letter of

n,M1pnDnI5:n nol3:: n5lnnfn).22

Solomon b. Jehuda (above,p. 476) also tells us of Egyptian communitiesapparently under the influence of the Babylonian Academy. Of course, Saadya, who hailed from 43-4; "'t3J,no. 312, by R. Samuel b. Hofni; ", No. 61, and 13nYil 'WI, ed. Schorr, p. 3, by R. Hai, seems to have been sent to Egypt; p"3, No. 72, fol. 24 a, 1. 6. See also VrI, No. 27, by R. Zemah, probably of Pumbedita, 872-90. In Wertheimer's ilDS rlnSp, p. 72, there are printed the headings of nine responsa by Sherira and Hai to Egypt (nflwn vlDi~ 2w"1n [n'Dll I 'Kll t1nlV VIt'1 ). Cf. also Pozna6ski, RtJ., VM 5"t IJ 1,1 .p XLVIII, 16I-2; LI, 57-8; JQR., N.S., III, 462, note I4. 22 The following lines, which I have copied from this Genizah fragment (T.-S. i6'3i8), will bring out more clearly the great reverence in which R. Hai was held. [n]rlp) nSrl nSD) nIrlI n lS 'N[rJ] ,. . (5)

,inS

Ten'

Vn115'rn

:

n [nv i 1$z mrinnomma 5 j 11(nIJ^ ?

?

r

*-

E

ca

~I

n

-

_

7

&

a

r

n r_

r

*

*

ITr~~~~~rt . rl

-0 r-H ^ 35~~~~ ~

-

.

~~- ~* rl

Ia r_3

a. Zlorrz r-â % 2; .- -- - *~~7r F : I rz --

r_

rl

r

,

r

?

-r

~~ ~ ?

t

n ~ ~J ~~

rz

r~~~~~~~~~~~i

~

~

~

d~

r

El

r

n

~

r-n

I

r_C !I

r

L3

,rl

nI -?

*

r

aSG

E;

nr

---i rr~~~~~ ~? 3_

r

.

S!

1 F -^

r l a ~~~~~~~~~2

~a ~ ~ . ~'z ? f~ ~z

n

x r

rl~~~r

-' rZ - J' -. ~ ~o" f n r F r -J J J^ ar ~~~~~~~~ c ~~ 35

r-

3

:^

rl

r

.

.

.

r b(~~~~~3

L'' r rZ

- -

*_

r

r-

a

~

:

,

r

'n

rZ- ? &

- ^

*

~

a~~~~~~i

-

*

I

r_,

l

'7,1

*

I

.

'

|

*^

zf:

r rr:

5 f2

. 131 ^Q

o?.

LI

t~

c

*Sî?:

I

nE

*

.zn

.

I-

-

Z,

E-

?

I

-

ri

ar

a'~,~

's

?

I

r

rz

ra"~~~~~IZ a~~~~~~~~Z

. rx

o

OF TIIE BABYLONIAN GEONIM-MANN

RESPONSA

347

u-

'

r IV-

F

rn

a

,:,

r ,,

r9

5

y

E-

i,

:

r

rC rr 3

13

' *

Z

U-

F, n :r

r

r_ -

C6 o n

-r

8

- ~ .

.

,

.

.

.;

+--

:

.

r

.

Îm

opr--

i r'

.

X

-n

a-

S-

o

n. p- c ?

. & I-- i > ?i i _f

r3 rs

iQ

r

~r

;

-

^

C 3I

r:

.

0

t. 0

. ,c,

._

.

.

~ n

. .

!

c r '

6

t?

348

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

3. Sherira and Hai. Above (VII, 467 if.) it has been pointed out, for the first time I believe, that Sherira, the Gaon of Pumbedita, apparently had his supreme court, the anm1 I tn3, in Bagdad. Probably the Ab Bet-Din resided in Pumbedita, where during the Kallah months the great meetings of the school were held. As the letter in Geonica (II, 87) has been shown above to have most likely been written by Nehemiah, this Gaon also resided in Bagdad. Farther on another letter by an anonymous Gaon from this city will be printed. As evidence for Sherira's supreme court at Bagdad a few essential lines were cited above from Bodl. 2876. I now subjoin here the whole fragment (A), according to the copy made by Dr. Cowley, who very kindly placed it at my disposal. A few remarks only have to be added as to the locality of the NPmrly Lplv at Bagdad. Le Strange in his Bagdad during the Abbasid Caliphate, I900, mentions a Suk al-'Atikah (p. 90) in the Sharkiyah Quarter, viz. that portion more on the river bank (of the Tigris) bore the name of an older suburb known as al-'Atikah (see map On the other hand a (or the) Jewish facing p. 47).48 quarter seems to have been farther west of the city. There existed a Kantarah-al-Yahuid which crossed the Karkhaya Canal (p. 150). Interesting for the cosmopolitan composition of the Bagdad Jewry is the mention of such names as 'Ali b. David the Palestinian (1. ii) and Nahum b. Aaron of Baalbek (1. i2). As regards Hai, the lines from T.-S. 13 J. I314 were n n~nDV Mn 'in;,ruM cited: n ;nrni Itwnnn rp= l;m 'In nlrln; mz^n14S,1-nDn 48

i 4w

Nn -,10%:

1 * 4wn SW

niur,

According to Yakit (see Wiistenfeld, ZDMG., XVIII, 399) the village Sunaya that stood on the western bank of the Tigris before the erection of Bagdad was afterwards called al-'AtTkah.


349

as showing that Hai resided at Bagdad (above, VII, 467). Pozn. (Babyl. Geonim, p. 90), who printed these lines, was not clear about them, and also doubted Solomon's (b. Judah) authorship of the letter. As will be shown in another connexion, Yahya was a son of Solomon b. Judah who went to Bagdad to study under Hai. The Jerusalem Gaon in this letter to an Egyptian dignitary mentions that an epistle from his son enclosed a letter from Hai. As further evidence of Bagdad having been the place of residence of Hai, I refer to the Genizah book-list, published by Pozn. in ZfHB., XII, 119-20 (No. III). Lines 17-18 read P. Pozn. remarks (p. 122), Dn nilwvn t,n :-i .,. l'i1: 'Responsen aus Bagdad an Hai, wohl: Responsen auf Anfragen aus Bagdad'. It is very unlikely that such a near community as Bagdad should have sent written questions to be answered by written responsa. As was pointed out above (VII, 461), this procedure was only the case with distant communities such as Basrah, and especially the countries outside Babylon. But now that we know of the Gaon's residence at Bagdad, there is little doubt that the above item in the book-list means 'Responsa (to some unknown community) by Hai (min :'wi) from Bagdad'. The fact that they existed in Fustat shows that they were either addressed to or passed through Egypt.49 Of considerable interest is fragment B, Or. 556I B, fols. 9-0o, parchment, brownish ink, square, very stained and 49 Cp. further Bodl. 287710 containing a letter from 51pf PplF DiD) iP to Joseph b. Jacob b. ~57 of Fustat. The correspondent says VTI pl

n ,zp Kt win Nni mrnn 4np $ t Pnnn 1 1m X ;em -IMJ i3n

i mnw sn- 6ii

rsn

n1:

K f ni

yn

m*

l u:

K

n Nxwvo y

jo.

The date 12I3 is impossible, more likely 10I3. The correspondent is perhaps the son of the Kairowan scholar Joseph b. Berachiah (cp. note 59). VOL. VIII.

Aa

35?

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

damaged. Neubauer published in JQR. (VI, 222-3) a fragmentary letter (Bodl. 26689 = MS. Heb. e. 44, fols. 80-I) which contained the well-known remarks about Shemariah (b. Elhanan), as a former NK,1,nri nnlw Kws of the academy, and his son Elhanan. Unfortunately the text was not edited with sufficient care. Neubauer failed to point out, in the first instance, that between fols. 80 and 8I there must be a gap, as is evident from the context. This gap is now partially filled up by fragment B, though there is evidently another gap between fols. 9 and Io of Or. I have convinced myself by comparing the two fragments that they are similar as regards the parchment, size, and handwriting, the only difference being that Bodl. has been very well preserved and is clearly legible, whereas Or. is much damaged. Moreover, the context proves Or. fol. 9 to be a continuation of Bodl. fol. 80, while Bodl. fol. 8I follows Or. fol. 10. In the latter case, especially the verse of Prov. ;ni 15' I [tni] nDii: runs on from io. 6, tDn ,iD5 5i;' one page to the other; the dots above the letters are in both fragments. The letter must have been of considerable length; with beginning and end missing and the gap between fols. 9-Io-it should be noted that both fragments are joined parchment double-leaves-it must have been double the present size.60 From the continuation it is now clear that the R. Jacob, mentioned at the end of Bodl. fol. 80 b, was not Jacob b. Nissim of Kairowan, as Neubauer, 1.c., and Halberstamm, ibid., 596, held for certain. He is the son of Joseph, most likely the same (b. 'Awkal or 'Awbal) whom Sherira and 50 It is now hardly necessary to add that the doubts of Halevy (n''l'1 iD'WKunl, III, 299) as to the authenticity of the Bodl. Genizah fragment are entirely unwarranted.


351

Hai eulogize so much in the letter printed by Marx, !QR., N. S., I, Ioi. He had rendered signal service to the academy during his stay in Babylon, and looked after its interests when residing in Egypt. Our fragment reflects a very depressed spirit of Sherira and Hai. That the letter emanates from them is clear from fol. 9, verso, 1. 8, ZK 1W IpI n:l, i.e. Hai. Sherira and Hai had evidently to encounter some opposition, as fol. io, recto, shows in particular (cp. 1. 4, nrt

D

n'np QN, and 1. 15, Qr~i

w).

But

who this opponent was is obscure. It is likewise difficult to ascertain who this Alluf was to whom this letter is 1tu:r i'm (fol. 9, addressed, and who is called [13vw] nmni verso, 1. 7). Eppenstein (Aschr., I9II, 476), who rightly suggested that R. Jacob at the end of Bodl. fol. 80 b was Jacob b. Josef (b. 'Awkal), is certain that the Alluf, to whom the letter was sent, was Jacob b. Nissim of Kairowan. Fragment B renders this suggestion highly improbable. The Alluf was evidently the representative of the academy to whom all donations were sent. Thus he transmitted the gift of Jacob b. Joseph (b. 'Awkal). He also had legacies for the academy (fol. Io, verso, 1. I ff.). It is very unlikely that Jacob b. Joseph should have sent his donations from Egypt to Jacob b. Nissim of Kairowan. The money would have to be sent back to Egypt for transmission to Babylon. The dangers of travelling in those days render such a procedure hardly likely. This Alluf must have lived in Egypt, where he acted as principal agent for the academy. He had friendly relations with Jacob b. Joseph (b. 'Awkal), Shemariah, and his son Elhanan, and also with Jacob Alluf b. [Nissim, as fol. Io, verso, 1. 15, is to be completed] of Kairowan. The people who left the legacies for the academy, viz. iD X. and David b. Joseph, apparently Aa 2

352


the Alluf's cousin, are quite unknown. This applies also to Hasan b. X. (fol. 9, verso, 1. I), with whom the Alluf corresponded. We come now to Bodl. fol. 8i, wherein Shemariah and Elhanan are mentioned. Besides minor omissions,51 a curious misreading of Neubauer obscured for so long an interesting and important detail of the inner organization of the academy. The colourless expression nrrw vKI 3lnnrm(! (p. 223, 1. I2), reads in the fragment nInw n KmY-im! We learn thus that the first of the three rows of the Pumbedita academy was called 'the row of the Nehardeans'. This suggests that when the famous school of Nehardea was closed, probably after the destruction of the town by Odenathus in 259,52 its scholars joined the newly-formed Pumbedita school and were granted the privilege of occupying the first row. In course of time the name remained, though its occupants were no longer scholars exclusively from Nehardea. We see that Shemariah was head of this row and yet he very probably came from Egypt, where his father held the dignity of w~', to Pumbedita for the purpose of study, just as his son Elhanan visited the school after him, and Solomon b. Judah sent his son Yahya to study under Hai. A suggestion may be ventured here that the 'row of the Nehardeans' was connected with the work of the In JQR., VI, p. 223, read i'T13 11'1 (11.3-4), 'lKR1'3 JliN n (1. la), 'V" C; (1. 23), brllIKnD n;1 (1. a6). Several words have rpI hIV Babylonian vowel-signs, while others have Tiberian. 52 Cp. Sherira's Letter Not t nK Vpn (p.29): rlMInI J11 n15 w 51

'n ann mm lnnt5 4nrb6v ,3=t=S5m3.=Nnl3 1}4 p3

IWnI) Mm-3 m53. 1541 Pa311

51tn g '-n;'m

N3-1-1 m3N2t nn

nlW nrl Nr1 piD (v. 1. nN"1315r ni1: 13yin Jew. Encyc., I, I45 b.

.

13! c011 See also Bacher,


353

Eastern Massorah. The Massoretic differences between Suranese ('t~D) and Nehardeans ('imn,m)are well known. R. Nahman, the well-known Amora of Nehardea, is mentioned as a Massorete in the Massorah Magna to ~ Gen. 27. 3 (prnm 2i ',n mn, cp. Ginsburg, n:r anan tnn Massora, I, 611i and Introduction, pp. 213 and 6II). A Massoretic fragment from the Genizah, which will be discussed in another connexion, mentions Nni' n'2i 'n'D. 'The house of Yelta' is probably the Massoretic school of R. Nahman. It was named so in honour of his wife Yalta, the daughter of the Exilarch (cp. Ber. 5Ib top, Shabb.

54b,

Gittin 67b, and Hullin I24a).

The work of the

Eastern Massorah53was hardly completed in Talmudic times. It is more probable that it was continued in the schools during the Gaonic period. Suranese had their academy, but the Massoretic work of the Nehardeans was carried on in the Pumbedita school, in particular by the occupants of the ritnm; nlw. It should be added that in the only instance in which Judah b. Ezekiel, the famous disciple of Rab and Samuel and founder of the Pumbedita school, is mentioned as a Massorete, he agrees with the Nehardean school. See the item in Ginsburg, Massora, I, 713a, which reads in the Genizah fragment mentioned before, ',n n,:1

i ,Dn1:nmn"ii 5SpTn, 1: ,^ D [i] ,hz inm (Deut. 32. 6) in nr4 N Nnr 4mi6i ntn'i w rT nnn Hpnnn Nnim .

nirib "l4

To return to Shemariah and his son Elhanan. About their activities in Egypt more will be said elsewhere. Here we are concerned with their relations with the Babylonian Geonim. As till now no responsum by Sherira and Hai to Shemariah was known, it will not be superfluous to cite here 53 About this Massorah in general see Kahle, Der MassoretischeText .. der Babyl. Juden,

1902,

and Die Massoreten des Ostens, I913.

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW 354

354

a few lines from Bodl. MS. Heb. e. 98 (not yet catalogued), fols. 22-3.14 They contain the beginni'ng of a pamphlet of Gaonic responsa, much damaged and torn. Fol. 22a reads : nnm~

Shem ria.

?~

i-- n Ber 13b, is Talmudmopy read

Asitanh,p.ea2,n.f).on

otom

cp

the onthertthand theaKairowasnetex

involves the difficulty of the Talmud adducing a verse about VriNv i: 1'Z3

(2 Sam. 20.

23) as an inferencefor

vr 13 ~ritii. Yet this text was the correct one in accordance with the reading of the Babylonian schools. This we learn from an interesting passage in R. Nissim's Maftea~ on Sanhedri'n (as published by Israel Le'vi, RA.ZY, XLIV, 294-7, from a Genizah fragment).55 For our purpose here 54 I am under obligation to Dr. Cowley for facilities granted to me in reading this manuscript. 55 P. 296: V143 4%??1I'N-1?- m t .. IN 12 P1V14 ~Mlitntg

RESPONSA


355

it is of interest to learn that in 991 Sherira and Hai sent responsa to Shemariah. The pamphlet (kvi) of responsa used to be called after the beginning of the first question. See in en"3,No. 314 Vva'1i-1=1 VV0? 16)m 'v1 vti-i

72-1P

PZi1irc

pn5 b

'lrb

nl?2nNzn

n4 t&In7?2m

txalva,

and Thus the

the indices of responsa in Geon., II, pp. 57 ff. pamphlet of responsa to Shemariah was called #iltN 1V

[imlv'pin]nulnz miDn. Neubauer (j7QR., VI, 222) writes that Shemariah emigrated to IKairowan. For this there is no evidence whatsoever, and as far as I can see, this has been accepted by no other writer. But about his son Elhanan, it became an accepted opinion that he emigrated to KIIairowan. This is a suggestion of Pozn. (R_7., XLVIII, i6i, and 1-m

lm2

i l11-K n a

on ;l`~, no. i (p. 2, 11. 2-4) ji v 1K1Jim wn1 p pn5m ~6 5V

based

jM)''r3 IMM, no. ii), i

This has been accepted by Eppenstein (Msckr., igii, 614) while Dr. Davidson (7QR., N.S., I913-14, 53) calls Elhanan 'the well-known scholar of Kairowan'. All this rests on a very weak foundation. We have only to consider that questions from Spain and North Africa had to pass through Egypt on the way to Babylon, and that these usually enclosed donations for the collection of which the central representative was in Egypt, then there is no ground for Elhanan's supposed stay in KfIairowan. When Jacob's ,immi urn i1 ynnim ~wmbt NnnwtviKl-) %ringor' -i 'nm nixrnni 1111NIM TN.I-n "ni

bi

'lnl ~ri$'gn$'ur~ ~rin~n

rrlino it visnP P-rur '1:31 rr -IV ~IIrr 72. R. Meir ha-Levi Abulafla(rl"7y,

Ii

cited by DikdukeSoferim,Sanh., 1.c.) quotesa responsumby Hai aboutthe readingof this Talmudicpassage; very likely our responsumis meanthere.

356


(b. Patruin) questions to Sherira and Hai arrived from Kairowan in Egypt, Elhanan b. Shemariah, who probably arranged their transmission to Babylon, enclosed his own questions to the Geonim.56 This process of transmission has to be kept in mind in order to understand the fact that copies of several epistles from Babylon to North Africa and Spain have been preserved in the Cairo Genizah. Again, the indices of responsa to Meshullam b. Kalonymos, to Fez and other countries (as preserved in Geon., II, and in Wertheimer's nra. ninp) clearly indicate that the responsa were copied by Fustat scholars for their own purposes. Reference is also made to the item in the above-mentioned book-list (1. I3), 1in iu1 nrritmnnriw, which shows that the 'questions from Tahort (in Morocco) to Hai' were copied in Fustat. In this connexion the following lines (the only ones I could make out) from T.-S. 8 J. 2812, vellum, damaged and torn, will be of some interest, especially as the persons mentioned therein are known from Gaonic responsa.57 The address (on verso) reads: 56

After writing this I have found a Genizah fragment, which will be published in another connexion, containing a letter by Elhanan to Damascus. Herein he states that report reached him of his son-in-law having been drowned in the sea and that his daughter was left behind in Kairowan. The l ri' corresponding lines read 12"11 l1niDn1D lkil 'm urii-rnwr ql 1 nbK 1I1nD î

M42 13t3t3 (r. linnn) uinnn nYlW

mnnmnmis,INvpzi1DnnnD,nin-w

W, 1;n

N123vnirnl

0 n imm yWnwrFn

rll"l yi31. Assuming that Elhanan's son-in-law was a native of Kairowan, it is possible that Elhanan visited this city on the marriage of his daughter. 57 This fragment is probably identical with the one cited byWorman, JQR., XIX, 730, no. xxv. The contents of Aram. box 64 have now, I understand, been transferred to bound volumes.


~r (5)

On the recto I read the following lines 3n4m' tv~ NYINI16DN)~yn

i (8)

witht Sherira and Hai (cf).

no-5(.

7 a~nd(6 ~Q.

.fl~ nos.

VI 223-4;

b.Arhm~mni oterp.ni loknownfrom

7,pns

lv~

mmn%N 1=

known fom othr Gatoni resp9 'onsaashain ... 351-69

357

correspovnded

J~- -iz

z~

.i~ n. 67).n Samuel4as having crepne

sent questions to Hai. We find him, according to our fragment, travelling with a caravan from Tahort to Egypt. On the way he passes K~abes, and Moses b. Samuel ibn jama' writes hastily a question to R. Hai which Sam. b. Abr. is to take with him to Egypt.5 There all the questions (as well as the donations) pass through the hands of Joseph b. Jacob (b. 'Awbal), who transmits them to the Gaon. This Joseph evidently transmitted in return the responsa from the academy to the communities of North Africa and beyond. This representative of the academy is clearly the son of Jacob (b. Joseph b. 'Awbal) who has been 58 The letter was given to a non-Jewish memiber of the caravan because Sam. b. Abr. had to leave in advance on account of the Sabbath (11.9, io).

THE JEWISH

358

QUARTERLY REVIEW

dealt with above. Continuing his father's tradition, Joseph looked after the interest of both the Sura and the Pumbedita academies in Egypt. This is evident from the letter of n3:l n1 Pt1: Samuel b. Hofni (YQR., XIV, 309, cp. 621: n . .,, 3p^ pppi P 1PN s1 10 5K). q [n]W

14p ntrnw4n nyrn

Joseph's sons were called Hillel and Benjamin. These are referred to in 1. I6 of our fragment. In addition to the few letters addressed to Joseph b. Jacob, as mentioned in the Bodl. Catalogue (II, Index),69 the following fragments are cited here. Or. 5542, fol. 22, contains a letter which reads on verso: :lZy p : plP tDW, 1p p: D1 , . YADMKI:I '11 60 ['D]p:Kal

nilp i sa gr

;Dnrwin

'mn.

tol'm

Likewise

Or. 5563, C, fol. 19, is addressed (on verso) ,D"mn ,1tl ID ii

^MV 1I I3W

tP qD

(2)

a-DiX

'2

i"b

:W

I 55NV NWSK

plnhDK;3 iD-Kt. Several persons are mentioned in the and nm tp lDr' letter, among them nmp[te ;MnVD r nnmD Finally in T.-S. 13 J. 2615 Joseph is styled wv ilo~ ;np wtn npr p . . . . :. His sons Hillel and Benjamin are nzn.?61

also mentioned. We thus learn that both he and his father bore the title of r: wt'n. 59 Bodl. 28779 contains a business letter, in Arabic, from 9: 3D.1l [Dl 0

,^3C1 to our Joseph b. Jacob. Probably the first of the correspondents is identical with the Kairowan scholar referred to farther on (under 4). W e shall thus learn that he had a brother called Nissim. 60 This Joseph b. Jacob of Tripoli, who is also the correspondent of the Bodl. letters, is probably identical with Il: Niq iD 'ILDlpl)Dt3 :p lD in the document of ny XVI, 575-6). (JQR., np)i 5'lfi o034 '5D D,pO This Tripoli is most likely the port on the North-African coast, east of Kabes (cp. map attached to Wiistenfeld, Geschichteder Fatimiden Chalfen). 61 Probably identical with the person mentioned in the deed drawn up at Kairowan in 1050 (Bodl. 2805. 23).


RESPONSA

359

A (recto) : 1 ......

.....

(4) nplp

...

.

. (3) K .....(2)

yW.....

(I)

mn ... .....' L. .. j13 ptn:ln,n .. rn (5) ] wmn tllwn'3 nrl nn^ntn ws- KzNn nIK-in n[*r]3 [nn31no nl . rK'rn mI *nl nn"n ns[3n] [J]' K..... , Kpny Kp^l3 n3 K9[FA]'n 3[([3]nip'Wwny nK[n n]5ni ?[5K nzw8] 53 K[D'P] mwn[n3n]n 62]tDKU n[i8] 8 i^8 88528 3K1 NPD

n3,Dpe nim 'rop3 [i'd] inwr note, 5y '6D 4nD

c. 5IE 'nn 'r'D inS'3on Kn'nast;

itself ntherive placdonbing

n [n nnngris

D 'K nw eof course 5, n'3 'a adlnD ins,

i

nrp

,n [!D 3n]3 Kn '^ nii 5nanp,Zn n l3 t

r_:'

.-

,1

r

Li

Lrr n 2

L

r

.b Fr

f:

r

Li

.

,

3

nr

ni

F

ri

r

r.

.

Cl C-4

r

ci

co, F

,-

C-

rl ri

r-

r Li r_' U ri

^

rF

a

;^

r

Li .

1-

r-

CEa r

Li

*

J

r

Fs

11

a

i

l

n

r

rb

*

n

"

,a

r-

r

r_

,J

L

-j

13 J r; I-" n rnF * r ri

Wr Q

ri 0J? 52

r

L 52

-.

F

J

"

I:

yr

rr

~-

Lr

-IN.

Z

a

C -P

13 n3 JEI ri

Li

r r_

r_

,

,

n

^

r:

r

~-

1E

i

trLS tr ' n F-

n f 1-

rF

r

pr

^ 9n

r

rF Li

a.

z

j-

m

n

r

r

*

o

.

r

3

o

x

.

e

?

i-I.-

r

Li p

? m

4->

S)

r i I

* L

5(

175

Q

' u' '? r' 1*L fl 3

r Li

:3

L

-

_


I76

0o

0 oF

Q

-

fi

::L

*

n

*

ct

.'

V

E.

a

C

$

.

.I

?L Li -1

:^ r c>

X

LJfi

'

-p

,

E Q n*'

.

12LEl F^ asi;

. FF

r

a

a

a

_

r ;3.E

: 1)

00 0 r1-f

c f

,-

n *

an,'

rF

r

hr

cd

.

U

M

n

3n 'ws

nt a

i

n'

f*-

ri

E '

r

w r

r

n

r

?i < r-^ra ar "r: r-

^r-7

xn ^>

rr

L .-

n

F _rNL

-Fr

P~ F

^

r

r_

cL t

0

r rL

r 3i

-

n-rIr

r n

-

r:

r^

rr

m

*

r rl f-i

ct-s

U2

_ I F

r:r r a

Li r

Lir

-El

d\

sr l L

^ ?

If

_

-

r s

x.

L ;

-

1$ *;^? 1

?

r

,-

o

r nr Fn_

n

-JF

r

n r

~.

n

r3 . ***

r

--

o

r

rl _

i

' o

.

n * -5'

Fs .r'.

F

^ n . m Li F

K I

.2 F L.

~a

~

2 Li^

U ;0 n:'

*a

F *r

t-

RESPONSA

??e,,

o?

.e

.,o

,*4

.,,

.

r-

.

r ~~~~~~~r rr

rr

177

~~~~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~u f< ~~~~

~~

,,.

GEONIM-MANN

ul

?/?

~

"~~

OF THE BABYLONIAN

r-- ?I?g ^t?& r

.,*

e.

,

.,

s

& |' 11

c~~~~~~~~~~c C~~~~if~~~~~~~~~~~~~

c

.I

r

13 c IrI_;' -?â^

a z_

f~

r;

~~~r ~~~~~~~7~r

-

~

a " ,_ r: ~;

z

CI a n

rr,^L~~~~J rr ,-r

~s

~-

fZ

13 r_

c

r_ ,-

?srl

r= gS^n^^n

.

n r

13c~3JI C

r-

r= fZ

* --E!, F^ .g g

z5 r=

r

-c

S~_6g

;-

-.3 |"E

3

g

nJ

IZ~~~I

1 5 r-ar

?

.~

f=-

n-

VOL

VOL. IX.

,.-

I

re-r-. -z

r:_

r--m

I~ r

o

I~ r rl

IC c*

........~--r

o(r'~

~~rl

n....E ,

h

,X

rC~~~~~~~ ;r .......~

. )i

C r_

c

_ X.

rz

.*

~

o

f

s~

l~

~~~ r: rl

1

r

-J~

n

~J I".~~

_ r

a-

?n rl

c

I~

?r

~~~

~r .

s . ~~~~~~~~~~~~3 ~~~ nn ::3

~~~~~~~..',,-

r

r_ f "

,-I

nr

rr_

r_

,,-::_

,

J" ^^ -'-

si

r-

r

(-

b r

r 1::

~r,,_

~

1

r

c

r-~ El~~~r f rt -I ;^ ^S-

r.

1_

n

p&'^^pce0;;

aF_-

r

.r

_

-

'

.

"- ^? Cf~~~~~~~~1 !1"

3r

rz

n-

'

Ir:

-'

rt-j^nacgr rJlff

?

r~~~~~j n nr

jjj-.-'.nr

i~~~~~~~~~~~~rJ rr .3

~ a

r .~3nIGf E^h^. n"-~~~~

-

u^ r /a1

. N

N

c

THE JEWISH

I78

J~

o

e .

e

.

e.

. .

.

.

*

.

..

.

*

'

'i

r

rC'rEr c)

,,

a3

?* ^

S:

. .1 2

=

~

r\^

* -

.

,

rn-

E

..

^:

e

.

-

'

r

S

r .f ^r

-

n -n

r,: !

.. .

a

a r

r -

o

.

*

*r

o

. *.

X*

r

>_

REVIEW

QUARTERLY

r_

,

isx

n arc : r: a:: :r_:'- :z r

r ~_

r Z

rn ?

?

!

S;!

n

. n .a

*

l

,

.

.

g)

lr .,, o o e .. ,, .,

~

.

.

o

.,.

-

.

~

o

.. . .


RESPONSA us

o

*0 0Q

.

.

.

.

+

*

**

*

*

*

*

.

.

**

,

.

.

.

*

.+

.

_

t

_

.

0*

*

j

*

* * *

*

*

r:sr

)

.

F

.

.

.c _

*

f

*

-;

*

*

L

o

?o \Q

*3

-*

179

.n

r

n

L I-

?*

t:

Cu :r h

j

E

F

~ Jr-_

r: r_

r

r

'

r

3r.n. -

.z . '

1 F .

.

. .

* 0IPLI.

._ n

~9 .)

C

*

n.

.

*

f

:5

=.

;'

r

.

* *

. .a.

.

.-

*

*

r

.

*

*

** .

..

_

.

:.

9

*

.

.

-

.

*

..

.

.*

9.

.3

.

nN

2

~ *

r

r

r

r

r

F . .

. r r9

:

.....

. *.

1

.F

.I:

51

r

.*r

= r

J .

n

'

i:'

r_ .

_-

'r-

'i

r

s

rr r rn

r

r

9

9

9

9

-

THE

RESPONSA

OF THE

BABYLONIAN

GEONIM AS A SOURCE OF JEWISH BY JACOB MANN, Jews' College, II.

HISTORY *

London.

THE POLITICAL STATUS OF THE JEWS.

AFTER having discussed the extent of the influence the Geonim had over the Jewries of the various countries of the diaspora, an attempt will be made in this chapter to describe the political status of the Jews. In the light of the material the Gaonic responsa furnish, we shall consider in particular the relation of the Jews to the secular authorities and to their non-Jewish neighbours, their attitude towards the non-Jewish courts, and finally their treatment of their slaves. (a) It is generally assumed that with the advent of the

Arabs to 'Irtk (637-43) the Jewish ecclesiastical authorities, the so-called Bet-Din that existed in most of the Jewish communities of 'Irak, and the members of which were appointed either by the Exilarch or by the Geonim, continued to have full autonomy and could act entirely in accordance with the Talmudic law. The Gaonic responsa, however, show that the Muslim conquerors encroached occasionally more or less upon the sphere of activity assigned to the Jewish courts or the Jewish communal leaders. The first innovation the Geonim had to make not long after the Arab conquest of 'Irrk was in all probability due to such an interference on the part of the Arab rulers. Sherira in his Letter (p. 35) states that the Geonim * See vols. VII, 457-90, VIII, 339-66, 121

IX, 139-79.

122


R. Raaba of Pumbedita and Huna of Sura (both held office after 660 C.E.) instituted that a woman, who defied her husband and was thus rendered liable to the charge of being a nnn% (in the Talmudic phrase), should be divorced at once. The Talmudic practice was to defer the divorce for twelve months in order that meanwhile a reconciliation might be brought about between husband and wife (see Ketubot 64a). Sherira himself explains in a responsum that the Geonim were forced to make this innovation because they saw 'that the daughters of Israel went and attached themselves to non-Jews in order to obtain a divorce through them from their husbands. These had in some cases to grant the divorce under compulsion '.18 This statement probably means, as Weiss (il"nn, IV, 8-9 and note 14) has pointed out, that the Muslim authorities could force the Jews to grant divorce in such cases, and in order to prevent such enforced divorces, which according to the Talmudic law are null and void (;nriwD m), the Geonim ordained that in the case of mn)'n the husband should at once divorce his wife by his own free will and was also bound to pay the amount of the Ketubah. The objections of Rabbinowitz (Graetz, Heb. ed., III, I31) against this assumption cannot hold good. The same phrase nn: rlnvyn[n: occurs also in another responsum of Sherira where it must also mean the protection afforded by a Muslim court or by some influential Arabs to a Jew ' nI1:m '1'W.v ltn, No. I40 = t'W, 56a, No. I5: mI35n i Inn Slaw nh5 nlmi; tnt ynsn D3Ol r) D3il tIS =V)w see also pD', No. 91, by Sherira. In l"1n, No. 89, the reason is: i'v 4i1 I31' W mVL mSI' :Xn which amounts to the same. Cp. also ,nyll n1nf Schechter's Saadyana, 147 (=JQR., XIV, 515), 11. if. . b =' nt ,, IW 151

,

iRii . , I,1w:NV

w,1z"maw nw

IDi' fW inpinw. ntn5wn rpnn

RESPONSA


123

against the ruling of the Bet-Din. The case (n"w,No. I82, see Einleit., 21 note) deals with a Jew that committed some transgression on the Sabbath for which he was to be flogged, and the fear is expressed that he might escape and try to obtain the protection of the non-Jewish court or of some influential Arab (si Tr: 1ixlt nrnil, see also n'n, No. I46, and n"n, No. 135). This decree about a ' defiant' wife (nnmn) which was promulgated soon after the conquest of Babylon by 'Omar probably applied to this country only. We have the evidence of Maimonides that it was not accepted by the majority of the Jews.182 A question that very frequently occupied the Jewish communities as a whole was the assessment of taxation. Generally the whole community of a district was made responsible for the entire amount of taxes that was imposed upon it. After the conquest of 'Irak and Syria by the Arabs under 'Omar, the Arab conqueror in organizing the new state fixed a poll-tax for all non-Muslims ('..), certain burdens in connexion with the quartering of Muhammedan soldiers,183and a graduated land tax (-\>, see Aug. Mtiller, ibid., I, 272). This organization of the state by 'Omar was probably adopted by the Arabs after their conquest of North Africa and Spain. As regards Babylon, Graetz assumes that the Exilarchs were responsible for the taxes which were collected from the Jews (V4, 13I and 435-6). But from the responsa it appears that the Arab authorities collected the taxes directly from 182npmn T1, nm, N

',n, 414:

nmv 5KNrvmu:1n

rr awsbS6i

Probably R. Natronai refers to this in a responsum in ''wn, II, 20, based on D 1S9 SY 'lS r1DI, n1= '35D ni313 5: ;1nDi Besah, 21 a. See also Aug. Miiller ibid., 274. 185

i.

12:

THE JEWISH

124

QUARTERLY REVIEW

the Jews. The Gaon R. Sheshna of Sura (before iooo Sel. = 689 c.E.) writes in a responsum that ' if the ruler or the tax-collector sends to the community and enjoins the pronouncing of a ban in his interest, and it is impossible to disobey on account of the compulsion, this tax that was imposed by means of the ban is not binding. But if they impose an oath, the community should refuse to administer the oath to the person concerned'.184 This responsum shows that the authorities availed themselves of the coercion practised by the Bet-Din for their own purpose, and thus in order to obtain a true estimate of a man's taxingpower, they ordered the Jewish courts or the communal leaders to announce a ban against or impose an oath upon a Jew for this purpose. The Gaon to whom this responsum is assigned was one of the earliest Geonim whose sphere of influence probably did not extend beyond Babylon and Persia, and we may therefore assume that the responsum refers to the conditions that existed in these countries alone. The Gaon's opinion is that the enforced oath should not be administered by the communal leaders and that the ban, though announced, would be rendered null and void, in order to counteract the extortions of the authorities. The tax-collectors mentioned in this responsum were certainly non-Jews. Had they been Jews appointed by the Exilarch, or by the communal leaders,

EW nDnisV liSwli Monm DnnnM DwoIW MSw *W3K I 1* nyl:Wi:N 5 wI n W3Zaw

*s 1S4 isYDni 1"pm 5uIvz nsnnM65qnp=14-w

D:3 init 1

fs'1 tn3n I5 6W 1z Ipl5v n. IDS Dn3D 53 Ilt ux

wDnw

No. I95; D'n, No. 121; nI'fl, I, 49, No. 13; 1"1 No. 26, and (nt, Dt), No. 26). Cp. also #3, No. 4o. This R. Sheshna was certainly the Gaon and not the father of the Gaon 'Amram (856-74) of whose official capacity as a scholar to whom questions were addressed nothing is known (see also Weiss, "1''i, 9, note 5i).

RESPONSA


I25

to collect the taxes, the Gaon would not have decided against them.'85 The whole tone of the responsum shows that the authorities were extortionate in their coercion of the Jewish community. In the same responsum is also mentioned the case of a Jew that was executed, and his property confiscated. Thereupon the authorities enjoined the Jewish communal leaders to announce a ban against anybody that concealed some money of the criminal in order to preserve it for his heirs, instead of handing it over to the authorities. In the time of R. Nahshon of Sura (874-82) we learn that the taxes and impositions weighed heavily upon the Jews in Babylon. On a question, that came probably from some community abroad, whether the scholars should be asked by the community to contribute their share to the amount of the taxes due to the government, the Gaon answers that 'though the king and his councillors impose taxes without a limit and make the burden still heavier upon the community', yet the scholars should not be taxed.l86 Probably the Gaon reflects here the deplorable state the Jews of Babylon must have been in, especially during the period of the decline of the 'Abbasid dynasty after the death of Mutassim in 842 (see Aug. Muller, ibid., I, 523 ff.). In the communities outside Babylon, in Palestine, North Africa, Spain, and southern France, we learn from the responsa that fixed amounts were imposed upon whole communities, and the communal leaders had the task and 185

Cp. D#?ID?,No. xo: when the community collected the taxes and one of the members declared that he possessed nothing, he was adjured.

1AnM Jlbn lS' j Ltt, "Yr W W tn ,nr.. in", No. 537: nm1 n-nnin pnp45 -D1N vgn 5. $y Irr7z.n pn S: IvPrnn1w 186

., ,01 3.--About the great number of taxes that existed under the Abbasid caliphs, cp. Kremer, . c., I, 278, and II, 488 ff.

THE JEWISH

I26

QUARTERLY REVIEW

the responsibility to assess each member of their community in accordance with his economic position. Thus the people of Tlemsen style their late communal leader 'the eye of the community and the first in every charitable affair as well as in the taxes and the impositions exacted from the community'.187 Often disputes arose in the communities as to who should contribute the most, whether the traders or the people who owned landed property, as we learn from responsa of French scholars, contemporaries of Sherira and Hai (see 3"?', Nos. 165 and 2o5). In n")*, No. i65, it is also stated that the community had to collect an amount of money for bribing the officials not to expose them to extortion and oppression.188 That the extortions of the authorities in the district of Kairowan became intolerable in the time of Sherira and Hai we can gather from a responsum of theirs preserved in rn", No. 346 (cp. Geon., II, 5). A Jew was much harassed in his place of residence by penal impositions, and he could not leave the town as his wife would be arrested instead and treated in a similar way. Accordingly people advised that Jew to write a bogus document of divorce to his wife, in order that she should be able to take possession of her husband's property as being her dowry, and her husband be at liberty to escape.189 It is expressly stated that some of the towns187

wn,

,II, 3

No. 9 ;1.t,

No. 37, by R. Hai: NKIWYl' . . .

m;1 nipn in, nnuzt loanwi 11 IjEWK: myn tpv.p1a Ilnp'mlYl p3f *Z i WY1, 'fine', was then the usual expression for tax. See n"1D, No. io: 1v5P 4wmnw ln5 s3 p^K-InN 1D* i DIt= nm3b5 KNzv. 188 wn5r mn'wrn nnrm~nr IZ. rbon pSri Pl1wt=w

5

189 aiwnnxsy rtn nw4lJ i n:Din ly m nlj 1:ti Win n pz5r DVN 413 nIVpID1VP MW139Y1 n1nCM.,1nn lslln Inw nK ^ Mr1ns311 nmivl minaln1:)h WW p ipni 5.Wnvanmr Inw5 5iDa tw allnJ-

RESPONSA


I27

people used to avail themselves of such devices in order to escape the impositions of the governor. That such devices had to be used is sufficiently eloquent of the position of the Jews in those districts. The screw of taxation was made more and more tight, so that people were compelled to leave their places of residence. A similar case is reported in another responsum (''"n, II, 58, No. 7). Jews who had to flee from their town, settled in another place where they were taxed by the Jewish community. But now the members of their former community bring forward claims against them, because they had undertaken in common the responsibility for the taxes. In the responsum it is stated that the authorities would exact the amount assessed irrespective of the actual number of the members of the community.190 In Palestine also, under the rule of the Egyptian dynasty of the Fatimids, the burden of taxation weighed heavily upon the Jews. In a letter to Ephraim b. Shemarya, head of the Palestinian synagogue of Fustat, the Jewish community of Jerusalem complain that they' suffer the yoke of the non-Jews who put all burdens' upon them. Though there was a famine ilnv ri 1p r1p'i 7yl

nD

= ,V1nnnnnm

inwK NKt nn

ns'

. This responsum belongs to the * jltW;l 'YV rn l1W i3 n:nX sent to in of Kairowan 991 c. E. (%"', Nos. 345-50, see group responsa p. 179, note i). It is interesting to note that the authorities did not confiscate this man's estate on his departure from the town. Further, the document of divorce, Ut, seems to have had legal recognition in the eyes of the authorities, and the wife was allowed to take possession of her former husband's estate in lieu of her dowry (1IJ:ll), in precedence to the claims of the authorities. *

?r= 1yZpi ?r-p^ irnrw by5fP p l:il2 '1l n In '=:lW 1ii This is S 5[D1 l nnrl'1. ' n11 responsum seemingly by R. Hai like the one preceding it. Miiller, Einleit., 34, note (last line) assigns it without any proof to R. Isaac the Tosafite. 190

-i5br

I28

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

in the country, the Jewish community had to find the usual amount of taxes imposed by the government, and had thus to appeal to their compatriots in Egypt for support.191 Several responsa deal with confiscation of money and property belonging to Jews, and with other kinds of interference on the part of the authorities. In some cases it may have been due to the punishment inflicted upon individual Jews that transgressed the law of the country (see t'9, 34b, No. 5 and 4 b, No. 38 by Saadya; "`, No. 3; n`, Nos. 9 and o09; D"D', No. 189). Some interesting points are contained in a list of headings of responsa quoted by Muller (Einleit., 53, note) from a Parma MS. Non-Jews give evidence against Jewish young people about their indecent behaviour, and the governor appoints a Jewish official to collect the fines he imposed upon .these young Jews, while granting this official a commission of ten per cent. Informing amongst Jews was an evil rampant in those times which often endangered the lives of many Jews while causing still further material loss. Accordingly the Bet-Din and the communal leaders dealt very severely with informers. Anybody that suffered from denunciation could pronounce a ban against those that denounced him to the authorities (see in, No. 333, end, by R. Hai; rn~n, 191Geniza Letter (published by Cowley, JQR., XIX, pp. 107-8, and V also by Wertheimer, niq3 rns 'IIt, II, 17): tWV'n b3:i'1 5W1N

SaIn^5yns31o 1imn nmmi* mWi ji;11n nmin v1npn Jn1tn n1ilnn 1n

MwM 43

V1 10n 'nn3 13

n;

Rn ...

n

3rl

mi nnlu D':1wm

1 I:5V nwSW1n 31n n11,n DuD >W ~n=1y illmp niWI ^naDo ' Nsh tw ri nn55 13x3.ml I neW,nvwvsnlb5 41 53n D'pWmv 3 Nis s z-l n3D3 uin 1=n nwv -y 1mW i S-Din ,n: (r. %ID:) It

4 D13,n tnD'nm1 I=

D^3 i:1n n3",nl1 Drl'n5D

RESPONSA


129

No. 193, by R. Joseph Ibn Abitur, and No. 195, end).l92 One of 'Omar's decrees was that a non-Muslim should 192 No indication is to be found in the Gaonic Responsa, as far as they are extant, that informers were sentenced to death by the Bet-Din in conjunction with the communal leaders. The responsa of the contemporary Spanish scholars also show no trace of this penal procedure. It is therefore surprising to find this drastic treatment of informers quite general among the Jewish communities chiefly in Spain. The first authority mentioned as having inflicted capital punishment on an informer, is R. Joseph Ibn Migash of Lucena, the disciple of Alfasi (see R. Juda b. Asher in fllltl

m185'f. 55: *1'w5^1KI m "! InN -1=D wvr p tjln Spa w rv1=w 1 n "m15,1). rwV nywl nwn n^ nr, an Maimonides, writing in Egypt, also refers to this punishment as quite usual in the 'towns of the West' (1~3iDl '1i32), i. e. Spain and Morocco, which latter country contained then II, ). Highly important is many Spanish Jews (nptlnU?l , p ^lri iin VIII, the letter of Solomon b. Aderet concerning the case of an informer in Barcelona (published by Kaufmann, JQR., VIII, 1896, pp. 228 ff., where he also discusses this question of Jewish informers in the Middle Ages on See further the important responsum of Asheri in tll"' pp. 2I7-28). W"'lBt, XVII, i. On the whole, the material available tends to show that chiefly in Spain informers paid the penalty of death for their denunciations. There the communities seem to have had the permission of the secular authorities for such a procedure. Altogether in Spain the communal leaders seem to have been invested with very great powers, amounting even to the right of inflicting capital punishment in some cases; a fact that greatly astonished Asheri when he came from Germany to settle in Toledo, as he writes in the important responsum in t"t?1 nl't, XVII, 8. Whether in the Gaonic period the Jewish communities anywhere in the diaspora, including even Spain, possessed such rights, is very doubtful. It is certainly surprising that in the numerous Gaonic responsa no mention is made of such formidable authority vested with the communal leaders. t' :lL' See further D"I'ID'11n1, ed. Bloch, p. 208, No. 137: n1"n tD 4^ 5zb n iD rnqW: 3 Nvt

r n" tj 5"1 p-l11m

nniN

nrlolDDl 14=n

nine nrywi nyrn 5V,plmnrvv nyvnt3 .. , wn n-p n5 inrDnr l nns -IDIbK m nD;n 6ni nn nwe W, Nrn 5 un isnN I, I*. n1 rin 1 "n1n. This responsum deals 21 1p inn pnll 'ln'`D '1nITnnT inr with conditions in Germany, where it seems informels were removed with the assistance of non-Jews (cp. further, ibid., p. 50, Nos. 313 and 3r7). In view of the above remarks, the responsum in Y'E, I82, 3n1DD 1I1Dln K VOL. X.

THE JEWISH

130

QUARTERLY REVIEW

suffer capital punishment in the case of his having spoken disparagingly of Muhammed and his religion (see Aug. Miiller, ibid., I, 273). A member of the Exilarch's family, who was to succeed the well-known David b. Zakkai, was denounced in Nisibis for such an offence and suffered the penalty.193 From a responsum we learn further that if a Jew was converted to Islam and then repented and returned to his former religion, he had to flee to another place where he would be unknown, else he forfeited his life.194 On the whole it may be assumed that a Jew found some protection on the part of the authorities and Courts against robbery and oppression by non-Jews. This was more or less the case both in Muhammedan and Christian countries. The responsa supply proofs for this assumption. Thus we read in a responsum of R. Semah (probably of Pumbedita, 872-90) about a Jew that traded in Egyptian towns, and while attempting to ford a river was drowned. When the relatives searched for the body, the non-Jews living by the side of the river gave evidence that they had seen the body floating but they did not pick it up for fear mn m IN

. I

,, . 5t

n nnym bnptr ia innnm wDwnr nm Q-iaap n ,p in1D lno Tn,1 v -rz ' -W'1 ni

in

i1 wv r,

n 5nn

5KtrF 5w "I -DIDI rpy KN5

mnlD:pi-n ing imnrln ly nzwn ?Kt6

en i 51K, is very 5 -iniojD1?5 inrnfln n1tr rv -DinSv 4'D st a a Gaon but not scholar. by Spanish likely by Babylonian 193 Report of Nathan the Babylonian (Neub., II, 82-3): rInlK K13 K1I DNDN ; a1KNn toh ini rp vin 4= rnl;vw nsN NF N;"n mrrwvW

inKl

my Dnv nn w n3 1i -^w inx mi

irztpDnN51 rna

o. 18 R. Monso3. n1n r1I Db n 5y vw 1i4 V"W, 26b, No. a8, by R. Moses of Sura, 832-43 c. E.: Tn ni' srW v 51 nn aMin.w D, 1 ., .pDy Jn^ tV bN )I N p3 33 )1)C p:j) 7 l-in nK D-Inn iD W"3 [ ilW?)3 pDY bY '17D1 'lpV Alfasi.

pI3t.

See also n"J, No. 491, by


139

the defendant that because he must not summon him before a non-Jewish court he is worse off than if non-Jews had bought the stolen goods.205 Yet the responsa mention several cases of Jews seeking redress against their coreligionists at non-Jewish courts. A Genizah Fragment of the year o106 (published by Poznarnski,RAy., XLVIII, I7I) tells us of a Jew, 'Amriin b. Elijah of Sicily, who had Ephraim b. Shemaryah arrested by the Muslim courtofficials in Fustat because the latter did not want to appear before a Muslim court to answer on the former's monetary claims. The arrested Jew justifies himself before the Muslim Judge that as Jews they had a court of their own for settling their disputes.206 In a responsum R. Moses b. Hanok ("w', 30 a, No. 9) decides in the case of a Jew who had his co-religionist arrested that he should pay all expenses which his co-religionist incurred through his imprisonment (see also r"ih, No. 2IO). Since Jews frequently brought their lawsuits before non-Jewish courts, repeated injunctions had to be made by the spiritual leaders of Jewry against this practice. In a Cambridge Genizah Fragment (published by Dr. Marmorstein, Monatsschrift, I906, 599) we read of an institution in a community that any Jew that brings his lawsuit before a non-Jewish court 205tnr l

;ân

2s0 8S

n7 - n8) ,1,n

2V06

1I8) nn^

mnl

) nl,S ;J n

nunrlz

%:9X

-InriDxn nNx

fln,,.

nn, *i3p1? i n '1 5 In

3*, 8p . D^^ln

ni,

*

'

ml In=

tnm

*m y'ln MnITn n^V:1 N3'N11Tz MIT=3IPW:).V ?n'lM 'il I QNvwirln;-im 206

(11. I7-r8)

IN-11 VIDpO.VZifi

niNs 11n4

o1 i

'D W'

nwi5^ nnN -v;

io (either by R. Paltoi or by R. Natronai); Dl1"a, No. 15 (anonymous). See also DtIM), No. 164.


32I

Jews outside Babylon who owned in addition public ovens (mnra, cp. p"~, Nos. 62 and 123, by R. Meshullam; n"l*), No. IIO by R. 'Amram). There were certain trades like the preparation of wine, butter, and cheese, and parchment, which on religious grounds Jews had to conduct by themselves; thus we find the Geonim having a good knowledge of how parchment was made.240 Several responsa show that Jews frequently travelled on the large navigable rivers like the Tigris, Euphrates, and Nile, and traversed the Mediterranean in pursuit of a livelihood. The Geonim were consulted as to the observance of the Sabbath on board ship.241 Similar questions were asked how the Sabbath should be kept while travelling in caravans (D',n, No. I55, by Sherira; n"nlm,No. 27; t"V, t2 a, No. ii, see In one responsum Sherira Miiller, Einleit., 14, note). mentions that Jews from the west (probably from Spain or Morocco) would come in caravans to Egypt traversing a great distance through desert land.242 Jews used to travel far and wide in their business enterprises, which often kept them away from their homes for years (see t'w, 76b, No. 26; ~"n, No. 49; p"', No. I7). This must have 240 See Nos. 33 and 46; #lDM, No. 155; "#in, Nos. 113-17; pt, "If, No. 5 (to Kairowan); pj', No. I27, by R. Meshullam; nfl, No. 333. 241 [, No. 6I (probably to Egypt by R. Hai): niltn,i=ilh olln

sz , . nntS

1 . t0nnT

i['3sn

nDnn

*

D ,nmnn igllnnon ,nw l nNY

,,,n.

3 K-i

01531

nlnin n5i nnaI 5

Bnn nDms mini 'lnr'n na

5N7nn

Mw hS '1

K nlmn

nrnnn

(probably Fustat)

DnX1

w ., nm4Dnn nvW1l^now 143n1?:w4snw. .

See further: 5"l, No. 45 (p. 17 b and I8 a by R. Jehudai, 760-64); "lnl,No. 31 (by R. Sema.h) and 43 (by R. Nahshon). ? t^5Y M:: V 242 In Dnnin ')DD, ed. Schorr, 76: $"t J^WvY 4 pi . I . nDi= K lil ill '4 jla3 IT1-1n215r Nmz5 Pon=W :rItyn

.,.

n 1 n.n=5 nsilI :11 nln nn ^Mw

w[zn4n lonn mn1n Y 2

is].

THE JEWISH

322

QUARTERLY REVIEW

happened very frequently so that the Bet-Din had to take the matter in hand, since it entailed many hardships for women who were left without their husbands for years. R. Natronai (of Sura, 853-6) states that the Bet-Din used to warn and to enjoin those that left their homes for business purposes not to stay away too long, especially when their wives objected to their husbands taking long and dangerous journeys.243 From the responsa we learn further of partnerships between Jews who lived in different countries, and that in many cases the goods had to be sent by ship from the place of one partner to that of the other (see "', 78 b, No. 8, by Saadya; 40 b, No. 24="w'n, II, 34, No. 13, by Hai). One responsum speaks of partners that lived apart a distance of two months' journey ("n, No. 42, by R. Nahshon, 874-82). In particular there must have been a brisk interchange of goods between the North African ports and the Spanish coast towns (see '"1niNo. 19 by R. Semah ; partners, one living in Kairowan and the other in Spain; n"', No. 59, to Kabes; n"'n, II, 31, No. 9 = n"i, No. 37, question came from Tlemsen). Probably R. Nahshon's responsum in a"n, No. 49, refers also to Spain. It speaks of a Jew who came to Ifrikiya and entered there into partnership with another 243

"Yn, No. 8I:

Ml~N=

nM1:I b :n.:U:

11K IK tC

t:t

'v

'

3

ninoS

;rn tnr ;n5y :\t:il 5]w ( nni] 5 mw1n?n ;'W"l2nr 1n 13^f"1'1I. See also "P, 9 b, No. 2: a Jew, who was betrothed to a woman, left for abroad where he was held up and forced to sign a document of divorce. Probably this refers to the Bet-Din there who forced him to divorce his betrothed because he left her. Cp. further, 1"~3, N ininnnnm: n^1rW No. I63: 'Iy nIIIT=: a WQ16 tvWr in t:

pm:n:

;Drn inr, ., wnlN.

lnn $5 nl:l

Dn tsW

l:p 1m

m

ninn 5 m1n


323

Jew, and then he left for abroad (ain':1I), where he traded with the goods from town to town. Another responsum (nlY'n, No. i92) speaks of a Jew who left Spain for some Christian country for business purposes and stayed there for six years (cp. also n`"r, No. 224; '"W,93 a, No. I; p", No. 5I). On these journeys Jews frequently encountered dangers on account of robbers and brigands, and had to give up all their money in order to save their lives.244 Various must have been the experiences of such Jewish travellers; frequently they were exposed to chicanery on the part of the various authorities of the many towns and municipalities through which they passed, and this constant struggling of the Jew with the circumstances around him made him versatile and able to help himself in every emergency. Responsa containing the legal decisions of the Geonim about monetary disputes amongst Jews are only a reflex of real life; the preponderant part of commercial dealings amongst people are settled without the necessity of bringing them before the courts. Yet even so, some responsa preserved read like fragments of the history of the time of their composition. In addition to the responsa discussed above (pp. 13I-3) two interesting responsa will serve as examples of the vicissitudes Jewish 244

Cp. IN, No. 426 from Tlemsen; Geon., II, I50 ("npn); .I", No. 7 and DZ", No. 94: these responsa deal with the dangers that were lurking on the road to Egypt; 1?"t1D,No. 213: Jews while travelling were captured by Arabs who brought them to Spain, where they were redeemed by their co-religionists; p", No. 66 by R. Meshullam; 'Int,No. 27 by R. Semah; V';, No. 41. Cp. further, Bodl. 287631, containing an undated letter, in Arabic, from 41^7 [lPDn to Dnl-l i1 pn '. He went from D1tiJR (Andalusia) to Alexandria on business.-A Cambridgefragment (published by Dr. Hirschfeld, JQR., XVI, 573 if.) tells us of a family from KIabeswhose members lived in Sicily, Marseilles, K.airowan, Tripoli, Alexandria, Fustat, and 'Akko.

QUARTERLY REVIEW

THE JEWISH

324

merchants passed through on their journeys. One responsum in n"nm, No. 2I6, tells us how B used to travel to maritime countries and A would be his assistant in transporting the goods. Once they agreed to share the profits of a certain kind of goods, and they travelled together because they were acquainted with the authorities of the route they took. On the way, while staying in a certain town, A had a mishap and had to bribe an official. At the port of embarkation they had to leave their money, which was confiscated by the authorities. When they arrived at the port of destination, B had to go back for the money which he could obtain only after bribing the officials.245 The other responsum in "g, 93 a, No. i, tells us how A, after having concluded a partnership with B, left for a maritime country where he traded for several years with much success. Wanting to return home at last, he took a boat with other Jews, but this soon foundered in a storm, and the passengers had to escape half-naked to the shore of the sea, leaving all their fortune behind. There this Jew A carried on business (to his discredit even 245

The responsum, which is fragmentary and obscure, runs as follows:

iâw n,iinr I

nZJ jnp 1i'e

nt bty d t p itDnni s 'n oae jynW countr nytaaNf1 srtae.:

I n cstoso

jl

nnw W ipn

np n rn5

forcoins tha wIere exported from th znnD nns tINSi

In,n nF, naw 5y ,nnnwnnK n^ySQK1:u n13D nnlrs3bliFw Uns Mvls5 nrmv nnvn.il nwit nizo mmc tsni D v D? V3NDOlMlly ns^ bi nv nnwnntD nnisma n4n In ,sinKDwi1n nv ,r,n .13410nnli ,,n,i

,. ..

nwgw ini

DÎDIna"Tpy3

ni m inyn 1nn

il N ol p^Dty w tpin:Pnn i

5ZlnE D31 D1

53.

It seems that they had to pay customs for coins that were exported from the country to a foreign state.

RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM--MANN

325

with blackmail), was successful, then lost his money, and then was again successful. Such responsa give us an inkling of the extensive trade carried on by Jews in that period. Of great furtherance for the expansion of the Jewish trade must have been the solidarity that existed among Jews all over the diaspora. Jewish business men could always find in the various communities of all the different countries friends among their brethren who could supply them with information about markets and other business concerns. Further, a Jew from whatever country when trading with his co-religionist would always find protection and redress at the hands of the Bet-Din or of the communal leaders of the different communities he visited on his travels far and wide. The Talmudic law by which the Jews of the Gaonic period were guided in all their affairs knows no difference between Jews of different countries; every Israelite is entitled to the same right. In a responsum (n"vn, No. r95, end) the Rabbi indignantly writes: 'If a stranger comes to a town do we deprive him of his money? Far be it from that! Such a thing shall never be in Israel!' 24 In addition, the fact that generally, with small exceptions, the Jews of that period could write and thus transmit their thoughts in writing, must have contributed much to the development of the Jewish trade. The religious duty of teaching every Jew the Law was practised from times of yore, and this had the result that almost every Jew could read Hebrew script. Thus in a responsum (n"j, No. 231, p. lo9) the Gaon states that 'as a rule a Jew knows the Hebrew script' (Yi 246

2n3 ;pln

Irnn NS !nr5n

!Si^wKnK13 rnwyn,k6.

5bw'

?.niD

npmn ntri inlr

. ,).

From being

mvy Ka^ mFpnapQ

wo:z)

THE JEWISH

326

QUARTERLY REVIEW

able to read to the ability of writing down the same letters is only a small step, and probably the large majority of Jews could write in the Hebrew script. Thus whatever vernaculars the Jews of the different countries might have spoken, be it Arabic or French, they could express their thoughts in their own language by means of the Hebrew script. That the Jews wrote Arabic in Hebrew script is well known. This was the case with the Jews of Arabia even in pre-Muhammedan times (cp. Gr., V4, 77 f.). There exist also a large number of responsa, both by earlier as well as by later Geonim, written originally in Arabic in the Hebrew script (cp. e.g. n"J,pp. 305I8, 339-41). Accordingly business correspondence could be carried on quite easily, and the other activities pertaining to clerkship performed in a time when the preponderant majority of non-Jews were analphabets. Several responsa tell us of proper business accounts kept in writing and of correspondence going on between partners who lived apart in different places. This must have been quite the general custom amongst Jewish traders. A responsum (V"s',74 b, No. 13, probably by Saadya) tells us of a Jew who died and his heirs produce ledgers and accounts and have them audited by reliable Jewish merchants. They ask now their opponent to produce counter-accounts 'in accordance with the. usage of business men' (rTnlDronl nn. Kiwlr'i nr 247 WnIW E1V). 247 See further,

i'l,

nmKn

No. 59 = Geon., II, 284 (written

in 1015 to Kabes,

cp. lp/", p. 32, note I): two partners who lived in different countries would carry on their business nY'W'

nn 1r11m

?nl

by means of correspondence ,itir

nir pr'nlm

na

(QIzNi N'Pw lp'i ; rn I ;wYrmw pprw

*,

5iK ?1a; n' see especially the TI nni5 ~lnn lw' ,, , ]2mI continuation of this responsum from a Bodl. MS. (in JQR., VI, 24):

.,.

nsin 1'i inavlm

515 y

wi1ix

,,

5

n m=vwn Do ,nim ...;


327

All these factors enabled the Jew to travel far and wide in his business enterprises and to maintain commercial relations with the remotest countries. Thus we can understand how Jewish business men could travel from the country of the Franks to China as the well-informed Arabic geographer, Ibn-Kordadbeh, in the middle of the ninth century reports (see above, p. I46). Jewish merchants, Ibn-Kordadbeh writes, called Radanites,248 who speak Persian, Rumish (Byzantine Greek), Arabic, Spanish, and Sicilian (Italian) would travel from the land of the Franks by boat to Egypt, where they landed at Farama, loaded their goods on animals, and would travel for five days to Kulzum (Suez). Once arrived there, they took the boat again and travelled along the Red Sea, stopping at al-Jar, the port of Medina, and at Jidda, the port of Mecca, till they reached the Indian Ocean. Another route these merchants chose was to land at the estuary of the Orontes and travel via Antioch, Aleppo, to the Euphrates, and then downwards this stream to Bagdad, whence they would pass on through a canal to the Tigris, Persian Gulf, and the Indian Ocean. Their ultimate goal would be the estuaries of the Indus, and the coasts of India and China. On their return they used to take the same route. But some of these merchants would go to Constantinople to dispose of their goods while others went directly bacl to the land of the Franks. When they preferred a landroute to a trip over the Mediterranean, they would travel ,"1, Nos. 5 and 423; Geon., II, 151, 1. 2 ff.; ibid., I,pr ; p"~, No. 146, No. 4 = ~", No. 5; "vlDn,No. 2; DZ",No. 32 by R. Meshullam; "tT1Df, 248 Perhaps these Jews were from the district of the Rh6ne, so that their proper name would be 'Rhodanici' (see Eppenstein in Gr. V4, 556, note to p. 203).

328

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

in caravans along France, Spain, Gibraltar, the whole of North Africa, Syria, Babylon, the southern provinces of Persia, Farsistan, and Kerman, and thence to India and China.243 Some merchants would take their way via Germany, the Slav countries to the town of the Chazars, Itil (above the estuary of the Volga), then traverse the Caspian Sea, reach Balk, Transoxania, and the countries of Tagazgaz. These Jewish merchants would bring from the Occident to the Orient eunuchs, slaves, both male and female, silk, swords, and furs. Whereas from the Orient they would return with musk, aloe, camphor, cinnamon, and the like products. This remarkable report of IbnKordadbeh throws much light on the commercial activities of the West-European Jews of those times, and shows what spirit of enterprise they possessed to undertake such journeys from the Frankish Empire to China, journeys which must have taken them years to accomplish. Many of the goods mentioned in this report in which the Jews traded are also mentioned in the Gaonic responsa. In France we find Jewish women making expensive gloves, embroidered with gold, and similar expensive garments. When these were sold the money was invested in expensive furs (p":, No. 66, by R. Meshullam). Likewise Jews traded in silk wares (tn3z, p", No. I50, cp. Rapoport, Introd. to p"7, 7b). In the time of R. Meshullam money-lending began to be a favourite occupation of the Jews in France (cp. p"I, No. 14I). In spite of all the prohibitions of the Church Councils we find a Jew in the service of the Bishop of Narbonne acting as his banker and the administrator of 249 The responsum of Sherira quoted above in note 242 probably refers to these long caravan journeys.

RESPONSA


329

his financial concerns.250 We learn further of a Jewish banker in the service of the Duke of Anjou. When the latter captured the Duke of Aquitania and received a large ransom for his release, he ordered his Jewish banker to carry out the required transaction of money-exchange.251 In money-lending a special kind of business developed amongst the Jews in France and Spain, called tNm'n 252(cp.

p"~,No. 15I a, 49; n"nt, No. 174). Jewish bankers would each have a number of Gentile clients whom they advanced all the money they required. The Bet-Din prohibited any Jew from taking away a client belonging to another 250

p#", No. I40:,

',,

2 Z1.nn ' W=N~'

" Im'" y171

nfl

Wln'inN'

DW5 CW1tW FU3 DM 'nDP^'1 NK 1*3IN nSp! 0l*pn onrcWDN DSp , 1ID3 Fn rK 1: nn 1n nj'n 14i. D41pi1nI cDtpIyO n m t3 lltnl P)D3s15in 511N 'uITyni. Dn 1M .,,npr3E: 1tnl This defines the scope of the transactions carried out by this banker of the bishop. t113n- (originally 7'^yEcpv,leader) was the Hebrew expression in those times for a bishop. 1 =OnW 251 . . , T3 ?YD', No. 152: Iy pDI nusn D-1r This event probably refers to the innRinpS , . pt1D 3l Onl I nK1t3. capture of either William VI, Duke of Aquitania, by Geoffrey of Anjou in 1037, or of his son, William VII, by the same in 1045, when Tours was taken (see Miller, note 4). 252 N'"S1 seems to me to be connected with the Syriac js., oo. See -s J' amoney-changer, cp. Pesh. Mark II. 15: . os Rapoport, Introd. to p"', 7 b, ? i6, but NRB'3D is never mentioned by Babylonian Geonim, only by Spanish and French scholars (see also Miiller,

n"n1mmn, pp. 2-3, V^n' n-srx ,ti ninr,n, XXXVII). ,l"n?D also uses this expression (see REJ., LVII, I98). Rapoport connects this word with the Arabic .>;, to be acquainted with, or to define, but this gives no proper meaning.-The nature of NS13'I is explained in D~nI^p

T",

II, n',

?

28:

Se aIs8o5i?

n aIso nnnt mnn155nlrl, p1eL;: r 8ilW

.. .n:w

Wo1In"' n4.in niW

15N.I45 a^ N ^ i ) D^ See also j"lK:, No. I04. pWllS

nNSn

33?


Jew's firm. Sometimes this prohibition was strengthened by a ban (cp. n'"m, No. 174; (?)n1nZpn n,: n'ln rlnw 'nlV p"nn Tn?i 5v n1n'lr:n

DNIn:

sW, see Miller,

note 6).

Above (p. 317) we have seen that many Jews in France and Spain possessed vineyards. As a result many Jews were wine merchants. Already Agobard, the notorious Bishop of Lyons, attacked the Jews on the ground that they sold adulterated wine (about 829 c. E., cp. Gr.,V4, 24I). The responsa also refer to this wine-business in the hands of Jews (cp. "'Dm,Nos. I55 and 205). Coming back to the responsa of the Babylonian Geonim, we find references to several trades practised by Jews in Babylon and in the North-African communities. R. Natronai in a responsum (l"n, No. 82) makes mention of Jews who traded in expensive clothes and in bullion (na2ns '1%' nl 1?tINDl 2n,t

nn

1I).

In another

responsum

(n"lo, No.

149, by R. Paltoi) it is stated: 'Germans (?) usually come to us with goods mostly in the summer and rarely in the winter. Usually they would bargain over our cloths and depreciate their value. But when they hear of another caravan coming behind them, or if they have suddenly to depart, they would hurriedly sell and buy all the required goods.' Further, large business usel( to be carried on in silk-wares. Saadya in a responsum (n"~,No. 556) mentions two partners investing large sums of money in silk (sn'nn n1W2''lz, cp. ,n", p. 277, note 2). One partner contributed about a thousand gold Dinars (a Dinar = about 30s.), a large sum in those days (see also t"Y'1, No. 135, from Tlemsen).253 From Kairowan a business transaction is 253About the silk trade see also above, p. 328, and further, Geon., II, 65: ' ' IYW 3. Brit. Mus. Add. 27,18I 4nN5 ~)V r i_ CY 'W ;p X } N,'l ~h1 ^.d1 (cp. above, note 7), fol, i6a (No. 61): DtiN1

(nl"p):

RESPONSA


331

reported of a Jew selling to another Jew a large quantity I ed. Wertheimer, 7I a, of pepper on board ship (nr[W nInp, 'N). We find further casual references to trading in wheat, animals, and property (V"w',77 b and 78a, Nos. 3-5, by R. Nahshon). Several responsa deal with cases of Jews buying bullion which they used to give to the mint to be coined. In those times no standard and uniform coinage existed. For example, the various provinces of the Muslim Empire had different standards. The Dinar of Yemen was much inferior in value to the Dinar of 'Irak. This brought about exchange-business in the coins of the different countries.25 In an Arabic question to Sherira there is mentioned the case of a Jew who possessed a grindstone for grinding the dust of gold and silver (,n", Nos. 370-I). Many responsa referred to above show that very close business relations existed between Jews and non-Jews. Especially in such undertakings as mills, inns, public baths, and landed property which required to be carried on also on the Sabbath, Jews would enter into partnership with -i6n mpn

Vnill 4V* nTbiNK

-NK

4

iI

cns l's rn~[ '1mDa[y[ s= s~ t na p p itbu

bwniTnmvpi?

Ptn

n:isn i1

vwntc

Kitw.

Cp. n.1, Nos. 386 and 424 (written in Arabic, translated by Harkavy into Hebrew, i'"13 P. 316ff.); X#"', 34a, No. 4, by Sar Shalom (cp. Einleit., I4, note): A bought gold in bullion from B, the banker, on a month's credit; ";', 34 a, No. 3 == "a, No. 52: the Gaon Sar Shalom is against those who lend defective coins and ask in return coins of full weight, lend silver in bullion and ask back coined silver, because this is usury; Z"',No. 165: a Jew possessing silver in bullion and being afraid that the coinage at the mint would be delayed, asks another Jew who was held in great honour by the master of the mint to give the bullion to the mint in his name.Mubaddasi (boru at Jerusalem in 946, began his work in 985) writes: In the province of Syria also, for the most part, the assayers of coin, the dyers, bankers and tanners are Jews, while it is most usual for the physicians and the scribes to be Christians' (cited by Le Strange, Palestine under the Moslems, 22). 254

332

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY

REVIEW

non-Jews who could thus conduct the business on the Jewish festivals (cp. n'=" , Nos. 53 and 55; V"'n, II, 57, No. 5; Geon., II, I86,3; 194, 1.9 ff.; 195 top and bottom; 196, 1. II if.; "n, No. xo). Other cases of Jews forwarding money to non-Jews for business purposes are mentioned in the responsa i'", Nos. 67 and 68. All this will show that the prohibition of R. Sar Shalom (849-53) that no Jew should enter into partnership with a non-Jew (n"1m, No. nry1W ~I2 I DI) was never carried 102, 1 3I nlmnlW ilW out in actual life. The responsa of the Spanish and French scholars referred to above (pp. 318-I9, 328-9) prove that at the close of the Gaonic period the Jews in France occupied themselves more and more with money-lending to nonJews on interest; no permission was any longer required for taking interest from a non-Jew. Characteristic is the question in V"', 35 b, No. 7 (anonymous) from some correspondent, whether a Jew who takes interest from a non-Jew should be excommunicated. This shows that in the place of that correspondent money-lending was quite unusual, but from the responsum it is impossible to gather whence it was sent. From the responsa we learn further of various combinations of partnerships, especially in cases where one partner was the capitalist and the other the salesman. Saadya, in a responsum (V"/', 96 b, No. I2) mentions a typical example of such a partnership. Two Jews invested 5,000 Dinars, a large sum of money in those days, in a banking business and in the sale of property, the proportion of the money invested by the two partners being 6 to 4, but since the second partner was the active business man the profits were fixed in the proportion of 5 to 7.255 Reference is also made in a responsum to the 255Cp. further "'/t, 93 b, Nos. 2 and 5 (by Sherira); No. 3, by Natronai;


333

way poor Jewish pedlars used to carry on their barter trade in the small towns and villages (probably in North Africa). They used to obtain loans from well-to-do Jews which enabled them to buy cheap crockery, flax, wool, and spices. These they would barter for wheat, barley, wax, and other articles. When advancing the money, the creditors would fix with the pedlars the prices of wheat and the other articles which the latter would bring them later on in payment of their debts. At times it would happen that the prices of these articles would rise before the money was due, so that it amounted to usury on the part of the lenders.256 All these casual and scattered references in the Gaonic responsa to the occupations and the economic position of the Jews which were discussed in this chapter, are only the reflex of the actual conditions. Only when disputes arose were they brought to the notice of the Geonim, who were asked to give their legal decision in accordance with the Talmudic civil law. But even these casual references in the responsa allow us to form an idea of the extent and the way Jews took part both in agriculture and trade in the countries of their diaspora. In conclusion of this chapter, mention is made of the interesting responsum in Arabic

VD"lD,No. go, by Saadya; I1.`, No. 235, from Kairowan; Yq", No. 43; "W, 98 b, No. 2I, by Saadya, translated from the Arabic. See also "W',96 a, No. xI by Saadya: two Jewish partners travel twice by ship with goods to ~5:3, which probably refers to Bagdad. 266 Geon., II, 80-8I: l4lDl" p".o1DnDV"1n=. n11"1S rjn,n "nm"D

n N'o.1ouon m'KW iY1

IYWI

.Xp3r

rwnl mrni ;nMI

tirp J.3i 13 anr ppDln nwir Tnp yDnigw iv 3tgn 1n )1. p13r1 nt npo prvnI Mirp0 ptt:D t-Dr14 n1:1. cp. also^n, No.

120.

334

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

concerning money-orders from one country to another.257 The Gaon maintains that according to the principles of the Talmudic civil law no legal claim can be brought forward should money sent in this way be lost in transmission. However, the Bet-Din began to deal with such claims because they saw that many people sent such moneyorders, and the Bet-Din did not want to place obstacles in the way of commercial relations between people. 257

H^, No. 423 (Hebrew translation by Harkavy on p. 316): 1:'1

t lbv * wn na m ^M . ,uw {,a ,r, [E-r'nn1] m ^ntn n1V3n? IrmjfW inUnn sNW Pn:r bp jly irninnin . . * wnnun, ronn r1nj;1?5lbpi wvnmm nPnnonr. ..3

7I

RESPONSA

IV.

THE


335

POWER OF THE BET-DIN

AND THE ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMUNITIES.

I. IN the preceding chapters we have seen how the spiritual leaders of Jewry greatly opposed the practice of Jews submitting their disputes to the decision of non-Jewish courts. On the whole it may be assumed that the bulk of the people followed the injunction of their spiritual leaders, and preferred to settle their cases before Jewish judges; both on religious and political grounds, the procedure of the secular courts found no favour in the eyes of the Jews. We have also discussed the occupations of the Jews, and have seen to what extent the Jews of those times occupied themselves both with agriculture and commerce. Thus for the common welfare of the Jewish communities there was a real need of an efficient Bet-Din. The Jewish judges usually worked hand in hand with the elders of the community ('Isn :pt), who, as we have seen above, were responsible for the taxes. Whenever the Bet-Din or the communal leaders found that their ruling was flouted or disobeyed by their coreligionists, they used to avail themselves of the power of coercion with which the secular authorities were invested, But the secular authorities could lend their assistance in monetary disputes only (see above, p. 142 ff.). In religious affairs, however, and on the whole the only coercive means at the disposal of the Bet-Din was the ban. It is true that VOL. X.

Z

336

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

flogging (nlipn) was the punishment inflicted by the Jewish courts for several transgressions. But if a Jew refused to undergo this punishment, he could only be coerced by means of excommunication (cp. also above, p. 129, note I92). It is no wonder therefore that the Geonim were anxious to make this only means of coercion as effective as possible. The welfare of the communities, both as regards morality and honest dealing, demanded that the ban should effectively take the place of imprisonment, and the other ways of coercion at the disposal of the non-Jewish courts. It must be admitted that the ban was a little too freely made use of, especially in the case of small transgressions in religious matters (to a great extent due to the opposition against the Karaites). Moreover, the Exilarchs frequently handled this social weapon for their own purposes, either to extort taxes or to impose their will on the Geonim (as the quarrel between David b. Zakkai and Saadya shows). Yet a strict enforcement of the ban was on the whole necessary when we review in general the great responsi, bilities that rested on the Bft-Din to ensure the peace and the good name of the Jewish communities. We find that the spiritual head of the Christians in Babylon, the Catholicos, could enforce his will on his co-religionists only by means of excommunication from the Church, refusal of sacraments, and prohibition of intercourse with Christians, just in the same way as the Bet-Din enforced its ruling. The legal decisions of the Catholici Henni1sh6 (686-701), Timotheos (780-823), and Jesubarnum (820-4) (published by Sachau, Syrische Rechtsbiicher, vol. II). show us several parallels between the methods of the Catholici and their subordinate local ecclesiastical courts on one hand, and of the Geonim and the local Jewish courts on

RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONiM-MANN

337

the other, in enforcing their ruling on their respective coreligionists. (See, e. g. Henanish6, Nos. 5, 8, 9, II, iz: the ban was announced in the churches of the respective district on festivals; I4: the coercion is to be carried out also with the help of the secular authorities, in case the ecclesiastical authority is disobeyed; 5 ; Timotheos, ?? 9, I3-14; Jesubarnum, ?? 34, 36-9, 65-6, 115, and 125.) 2. The chief source of information about the organization of the Jewish courts in Babylon is to be found in Nathan's report (Neub., II, 85-6). The responsa supply several supplementary details. In Babylon the exilarchs were entitled to appoint judges for the communities that were within their sphere of influence. The Geonim also undoubtedly possessed the same right in the districts under the jurisdiction of their respective academies (see Neub., II, 81 and 82, beginning, and 86, and also Aptowitzer, YQR., N. S., IV, 3I).258 The diploma given to such judges is preserved in a Gaonic responsum, according to which they were invested with the authority of settling legal disputes and of supervising the practice of all ritual commandments, religious laws, and moral conduct.259 Such 258 It is of interest to learn that Saadya's rival to the Gaonate of Sura, Khalaf b. Sarjado, could appoint his nominee as Dayan of the distant community of Mossul (see Harkavy, Studien u. Mitteilungen, V, 207,11. 9-1:

: lSj

r=3 n

-p *n^ K'wD [13]

nIDS 45N r 13'1')

:1.p

:wD

5u1DiS 1I-r nSniuD). n.x, No. I80 (probably by Hai to Kairowan, written in IonI, see ri:v -m n t"a ibid., 76, note 4): 5n3 ,nn ,in 51i: PDF In 259

nrINl

Mp^=

ln^t

-inipl

n]wi

mn:

m1 1rnr xm3W

wi-

15 r;nini

19w

1^rs

n~ ,n1 n Kpnn n' snimi lpnvD n,mt rp n 494 i , rwnnitl ^4F: 1tnh N1W i'nn)D 1^ ln M l Mn inpD sin)lXD snm~ 51smot'1 5by ,~n,Wn,SnnlEn,nm 'Xw p :rn: tD^yn tm^r nt':n^ Knswb n^ l1tna. ,nii nR (See also t"u1, No. T56, and nl"r, No. 217). Z2

338

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

a judge, on his arrival at his new place of activity, had to select two assessors from amongst the respected members of the community, in the first instance in order to constitute a proper Bet-Din which had to consist of at least three members, but chiefly for the purpose of being informed of the affairs of the community by members of long standing. The elders of the communities would supervise the activities of the respective judges, and could demand from the Exilarch, or the Geonim respectively, the deposal of unworthy judges. The Exilarch had a high-court situated at his place of residence, which, as we have seen above (VII, 469), was Bagdad since the times is mentioned nr of Manstr. This high-court, or NK'Wn sb, in tn", No. 555: sa*;=

m1I sNnnl K-

s

p NDn'

-W ptD znn

.n* uvn pIn sannm, aW , i If the Exilarch happened nnVYD 1b: n 1m1'nmWT n r: sn tnnn. -Pm: wn3vp5 ,np p?nlr

to be a scholar, it is only natural that he would preside over the high-court. Thus in tn", No. 555, we find the expression that "the Exilarch (David b. Za,kkai) gave judgement based on substantial Halakot and clear arguments' (Nnwma:ssns31n ;e s w,nsmnn nnt snN -Wsnpirm But since most of the Exilarchs were not 'r': InDl).260 learned and owed their exalted position merely to their descent from the Davidic family, they usually had a prominent scholar presiding over their High Court. We possess a responsum by a president of this High Court, R. Semah, sent to Kairowan.261 He must have attained 260About the learned Exilarch Solomon b. Hisdai, see Halevy, ni'B'T cD1VIYW, III, 213-14. 261 Dukes in s tn , IV,I41-2 prints from an Oxford MS.:sD1tD 18

1 nV4 o:t w: :IW,W rn6r wr win N: ,ZbVTnw1r vh^ w nt:)i 1 sn6 n 14 3 n: 535 ,nT3nPNf n1 K; 33

l tnan lnlwnrivitl


339

considerable reputation that such a distant community asked for his opinion in religious matters. Probably the local judges in the communities under the Exilarch's jurisdiction consulted the High Court in difficult cases. Moreover, one of the parties concerned in a lawsuit could refuse to submit to the decision of the local judge and demand that the dispute should be settled by the High Court. From a Gaonic Document, published by Aptowitzer, YQR., N. S., IV, 25, No. i,262 we know that this was the case as regards the High Courts of the Academies. In all probability the same procedure was in force at the Exilarch's High Court. The High Court of each of the two Academies was also presided over by an eminent NVt I (see Ginzberg, scholar, the so-called tr7 n: :'I or m::' This Geon., I, 11, note 4; Aptowitzer, ibid., 35-8). the Court of was second Academy president of the High in rank to the Gaon, the supreme authority (but see above, VII, 468 ff.). It appears that the decisions rendered by the Exilarch's High Court had to be ratified by the High Courts of both Academies, as the responsum in ,n"i,No. 555, quoted above, p. 338, clearly shows. Moreover, it is well known that the quarrel between David b. Zakkai and Saadya arose because the latter refused to ratify a docubD:n a^rDin . Kp'nas nDnD1 j%nTpl 3smn,Dnn 7kwl \33dpn See also I1"#,p. 389. This R. Semah seems to have been identical with the N::'1 WWI mentioned by R. 'Amram at the beginning of his Siddur 3 a, No. I7, there is mentioned "3W'n :1 "ID (cp. 5", No. 56). In #".W who after the death of Bustanai issued a deed of freedom t N:IZI NMKV1, to the exilarch's widow, the daughter of the Persian king Khusrau, in order that her children, the sons of Bustanai, should be in the status of freedmen. Cp. Eppenstein, Monatsschrift, I908, 336--7. "262% Ipl=nvpi ' y3Zn l 5p ipn , P.Sw .32 )nma im' rS,

m 3v. Cp., ibd., p.32. 3 w"DrIl 4gSP1.V'4 p 1 ,i3I5Wn '1 Nzza wnnlp ynvn 4np4iyzn). Cp., ibid., p. 32.

Nnz,nn1n

i


340

ment issued by the former's High Court, whereas Kohen Sedek complied with the request of the Exilarch (see Nathan's report in Neub., II, 8o-81). In Babylon the judge of a community had fixed emoluments from every member of his community above the age of twenty, and he also took fees for all legal documents which none but his scribe was allowed to draw up (Nathan in Neub., II, 85-6) As regards the communities outside Babylon, we may assume that in Egypt the Nagid generally had the power of appointing judges over the communities under his jurisdiction. But in other countries each community used to elect a judge of its own accord. We find references to communities that possessed no permanent Bet-Din. In such cases the elders of the community used to settle by arbitration disputes arising amongst Jews. Thus the iesponsum in l"w, 84b, No. 4, speaks of a community which has no permanent Bet-Din, but where the elders, the disciples, and the respected members of the congregation 'settle all disputes arising amongst the Jews'.263 Likewise in x"w, 90 a, No. 29, the Gaon mentions 'the people that are fit to settle disputes amongst the members of a community that has no permanent Bet-Din' (a~ntm a,wKn mp~?2 i,M:1Dl"n pKW ,n p: nnv'). On the other hand, several responsa refer to communities with permanent courts (cp. n"l, No. 80oand " b,90 b, No. 33). The Geonim were careful in recognizing the authority of such judges 263

1Sln1 V..ni's

1ln2m ,.

\5 ) WWP niSWC

alsinpu1"

I,r a1mlnIDWInnml n n aptmrn 5 Iamni ,I

4 pWNo DIpn:

, ? inpm 1r

i'n, tIn 1V5I ..W nD 15 `Fiw iniN. Cp. also n"., No. 233: ,i,,.

bM'pr,:

anSD m-rn,xl7 wNy3"snn n

,. . cni^tn.

,n,5in 6i~ t,n

,= N=,


341

who had not their authorization in communities abroad. R. Hai was consulted by his correspondents in Kairowan as to the case of a Jew who swore not to attend at the local Bet-Din, though the members of the community established a permanent Bet-Din, and undertook to submit all their disputes to its decision. The Gaon in his answer draws the distinction between a judge appointed by thb High Court of the Academy and one that had no such authorization. In the case of the former, any person that pronounced such an oath would be forced to appear before the Bet-Din and would be flogged (npmn) for his oath. Whereas in the case of the latter, such a procedure cannot be enforced (n"j, No. I8o). From some community there came the complaint to R. Hai about the scandalous procedure of the local judges who would allow the beds of the poor, as well as their other belongings, to be taken as pledges, in contradiction to the Talmudic law (n"r', No. 86). The Gaon rightly gives vent to his indignation at such proceedings, and strongly urges upon his correspondents to do everything in their power in order to bring about the deposal of such judges. This can only refer to some community outside Babylon, since in Babylon the High Court of the-Academy had the authority to remove such judges. All that the Geonim demand of such courts in countries outside Babylon is that they should be eminent and command the respect of everybody (see the definition of nln '"l: in ;n", No. 240, and cp. n"a,No. 14 = No. 255, end). Each community probably provided from the public funds for the maintenance of its Bet-Din. A responsum in 1'", No. 82, mentions the case of a Jew who bequeathed the rental of his house for the use of the synagogue. The communal leaders, however, used the


342

rent for the salary of the judge of their community (,rS S MnDnw, rni ;',w ,n~'~ pO:nw, see also D"~,No. 7). 3. On the whole, the Talmudic law was the guide of the Jewish judges in their dispensation of justice. For religious transgressions, flagellation in various degrees was inflicted, whereas in monetary lawsuits oaths would be administered. But in order to enforce its ruling, the B6tDin in the Gaonic times, as well as long afterwards, had only one means at its disposal, and that was the ban. All this was in use in Talmudic times. From the Gaonic responsa, however, we obtain a detailed account of the procedure of the Bet-Din. (a) Corporal Punishment. There were two grades of flagellation, the so-called Mnp)Dfor transgressions against Biblical commandments, and nritn n:n for acting contrary to the prohibitions of the Rabbis (n"', No. 9). The former, as is well known, consisted of thirty-nine stripes. But there are conflicting statements as regards the latter. R. Natronai states in a responsum (x"W,91 b, No. 39= a"n, No. 89; cp. n"', No. i8I) that the so-called flagellation of minj was no longer practised in his time, whereas the nvvnz n:n had no fixed number of stripes, but was continued till the person concerned submitted to the decision of the BetDin.264 But from responsa by Sherira and Hai it is evident that flagellation, consisting of thirty-nine stripes, was in practice still in their time (see 'n", No. 440 (sent 264

i,nnIrl ,nr:nn

1 IKsi3p,W 7pn1P IniK

noJnin tN nrln 1nrsis

j3 P1 m

im 5 NnlKInw nn~ n3n11,'is Dn 'n

rnyV. In this connexion cp. the statement of Samuel ha-Nagid in a responsum (quoted in nIfIl 'ISD, ed. Schorr, 267) concerning people who were suspected of heresy and whom the early Spanish authorities had flogged:

I'n.

1,p,n

t1nn

inni nlpn5a

Mrlw

nVw

1nn 1pM

)jl7p1.


343

to Kairowan in 997; cp. ibid., p. 235, note i)= "en, II, 4I, No. 6). It seems that this punishment was inflicted for transgressions that could not be repaired, e. g. desecration of the Sabbath. Whereas for the purpose of enforcing the ruling of the Bet-Din, the flagellation went on till the culprit acquiesced. However, ;U~n : n vrnio nsD is mentioned by R. Yehudai (760-4) for transgressions that could not be repaired (cp. i"'vn, I, 29, and II, 18; see also n"w, No. I5, and Einleit., to, note).265 During the flagellation corresponding verses from the Bible were recited, and the culprit had to make confession and ask for divine forgiveness (n"j, No. 440='I"'n, II, 41, No. 6). It seems also that the culprit was adjured not to repeat his sin (n"w, No. 7, and the responsum quoted by Mullerl, Einleit., 6, note 4). 265Quite a new distinction between and lWn n1: s is introduced nlp5n d. 'D 'Iw (Jahrb. Jiud.-Liter.Gesellschaft,Frankfurt, V, Hebrew YVy

in nlm

part, p. 67, No 2o):

' nein t ITnm L ppSw op

,DI 1-nnjlnl pnw

L nzmrws vw nw1DEW

nniwvn n 1n?nllzwn43 nnrD nnn.

As the responsa of the Babylonian Geonim, which we have discussed, do not know of this distinction, the above summary rather represents the views of the Palestinian Geonim than those of the Babylonian scholars. J. N. Epstein (in Jahrbuch, vol. VIII, 450) could not find what was 'obscure' in the summary of Et'nl V"Vy-'n 'D. But his references to 'similar' responsa by Natronai and Hai (Xt'W,V, 7 (9g b) No 39, and ntw, No. 15) are hardly to the point in question.-According to a responsum by Saadya (cited by Poznanski, JQR., N. S., III, 427) nlnID FrD consisted of thirteen stripes for the transgression of a' traditional precept, such as hair-cutting on Dnirl or wearing shoes during the days of mourning. This must have been the lenient side of n1lI'D I3t for slight transgressions. This number of thirteen stripes is also ordained by R. Hai, unnoticed by Poznanski (in a responsum cited by Muller, Einleit., 6, note, from ni,"2Q, II, ? 150), 31 .*,.

n,

nrin,6

ilZ ,,, nrwnn nn1Djrw

5 ) . , nD7*l? tni

lin pm :n1

R jv

51rR 1321

3f

: muj)p D 14= 1in nipm

'/ Inm p in WnnD= 3l 13i11 i'lmnm rhJzIDnnr"s

WW4.

344

THIE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

For certain transgressions, flagellation was accompanied by shaving the culprit's head and beard. Thus in Vew, 25 a, No. 13 (anonymous; in i,n, No. 94, by R. Natronai), we read that if a Jew be found guilty of having committed adultery with his female slave, he should be flogged and his hair shaved off. Likewise, in the case of adultery with a married woman, both culprits were flogged and had their hair shaved off (i"vn, I, 29, among the nrl:p nrn' of R. Yehudai = n'"n, II, i8, 1. II, among the responsa of R. Natronai). The same punishment was inflicted for desecrating the Sabbath (n"'n, II, o2). This strange punishment, which, as far as my knowledge goes, is not found in the Talmud,266must have been borrowed by the Jews from the secular authorities. This punishment was practised in Spain under the Visigoths. One of the decrees of King Erwich, 680-7, was that the Jews who within a year from the publication of the decree, were not themselves or had not their children baptized, should be punished by a hundred stripes, cutting of the hair of the head, banishment, and confiscation of property (cp. Caro, Social- U. Wirtschaftsgeschichte der 7uden, 73). This punishment of shaving the hair must have been usual in the Middle Ages ini many countries. Cp. further Dr. Biichler, 'Das Schneiden des Haares als Strafe der Ehebrecher bei den Semiten' (in Wiener Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde des Morgenlandes, XIX, 91 ff.). It seems that there existed a kind of communal prison for the internment of culprits pending 266 Perhaps a reference to this kind of punishment is to be found in Sanh. IIo a top, where the wife of Korah is supposed to have said to her 'he Z husband: NnI'I ' 125 5D'l V1'5-t" *WIl :?zn5 (Moses) shaved you all over and sports with you as (with a prisoner) in the stocks' (to &nlI1S, cp. also Jastrow, Dictionary, s. RMl'ZI). Rashi, however, gives a different explanation.


345

their trial at the Bet-Din. Thus, if a Jew committed some transgression on the Sabbath or on the Festivals, when he could not be flogged, he was imprisoned for that day, in order to prevent his escape kt"ln, No. 146, by No." and Sherira; n', 135, by R. Paltoi of Pumbedita, 842-58; n"w, No. I82, cannot be by Sherira, as it contradicts n"^n, No. 146, whereas it agrees with -",n, No. 135). In all these responsa there is expressly mentioned the communal prison (n,,Dn na). Likewise, in the Frankish Empire it seems that the Jewish authorities had the right of imprisoning a Jewish culprit. Thus in the year 576 C.E., we are told, St. Germanus on his journey from Tours to Severiacus found the Jew Amantius in chains and led by Jews, because he refused to obey the Jewish laws (see Aronius, Regesten zur Geschichte der 7uden im frdnkischen und deutschen Reiche, p. 13, to the year 576). However, confinement in a prison for a certain period as a punishment for transgressions was imposed by Jewish law only in a very few cases (cp. Sanh. 93, p'vnb nMw5inis, as regards a homicide against whom there are no witnesses, and also as regards a culprit who persists in his transgression for which he had received already twice flagellation, see Frankel, Der gerichtliche Beweis, p. 167, and the instructive note in Lewy, Abba Saul, p. 35, note 85). (b) Oath. The proper oath, which was accompanied by the laying of the hand on a scroll of the Law (,nmnmna), was abolished by the Gaon R. Sadok, 823-5. The reason for this abolition was because people were ready to take the oath without much consideration, and the Geonim were afraid of the serious Divine punishment consequent upon perjury (O"n,No. 22, by R. Natronai = p"), No. 43; op. Geon., II, 154 (0"pn), x"v, 73 a, No. 9, by R. Hai). This

THE JEWISH

346

QUARTERLY REVIEW

change introduced by R. Sadok spread only gradually. In the time of R. Paltoi we find judges still continuing to adjure people with the proper oath, ,mrnn nylMw(cp. i", No. io). As a substitute for the proper oath, curses used to be pronounced against any one who gave false evidence in monetary lawsuits. In order to make these curses, called snnT, effective, they were pronounced in the synagogue accompanied by a solemn ceremony, which we find fully described in two responsa (["', No. 1o, by Paltoi, 842-58, and Y"v, 76 a, No. 2, by R. Hai). The scroll of the Law was taken out from the ark, while the person concerned was familiarized with the curses that occur in the Bible. A bier was brought to the synagogue, and on it lay the shroud of the dead. Ashes were strewn under the feet of the person concerned, and inflated bladders as well as a cock were brought to the synagogue. The candles were lighted and the school-children were present. Then to the accompaniment of horns, the delegate of the Bet-Din pronounced against the person concerned curses which would be fulfilled, in case he was making false statements. All the details of this ceremony, so strange and gruesome as they appear to us, had symbolical meanings, and were meant to impress upon the adjured the responsibility he undertook in making his statements before the court.267 Generally, this ceremony 267 5,", No. Io:

m*l

Ww ml

Ill'

ntOi3 i

,nIIyl IR;twV Dntp:rno lnl

nllilnI

.

naM :nn=1

p n ' rSno 55ittn

tnhS

. v

nti

I n'li*nl nrnm I w 4xmsFn DMnW1;m5=n.5? 1i'0D='13re. .ni n ~ ;'wn)m nh rns -'1rWY1Dr'llD nrV ImN

Ynr=nnwiK ivY

=17K=

nID

11 n6

' 1~5ni

l nf ,wn w nes iPTnmns pp,'Inns t.I nvs:n ptOthese details.n Someof "ID4N W =3I m1l:l ~rlnL. pSmn

0 . . nai1 3D1lll

ttillnltin-zivz14tP

1

'T (M1 /p

nnzw

Someof thesedetails


347

used to take place in the synagogue on Mondays and Thursdays after the morning service, whilst all the worshippers were present (S"a, No. 9, probably by R. Hai). Even married women had to go through the same ceremony in public ("w', 69 a, No. 72, by Natronai, which agrees with the responsum quoted in i", No. 9, in the name of R. Semah). Later Geonim, however, seem to have spared married women this publicity, and allowed them to be No. 9). adjured privately in the presence of three Jews (%"a, Another kind of adjuration was administered in cases of suspicion. For example, if a Jew suspected another Jew of having stolen something from his house or of having denounced him to the secular authorities, he could, after having substantiated his suspicions, obtain from the BetDin the permission of having a ban or curses announced in the synagogue anonymously against anybody that caused him harm. This permission, which was called snmin' spn (ni", Nos. i and 333), was, however, not accompanied by the ceremony described above (cp. ~"n, No. 137, by R. Hai; n"/2t, No. 193, by R. Joseph Ibn Abitur of Cordova; p'", No. 13). The same permission was granted by the BetDin, on the demand of one of the parties concerned in a lawsuit, against any person that refrained from coming to the Bet-Din and giving his evidence (see the Gaonic Document published by Aptowitzer, YQR., N. S., IV, 28, No. VII). R. Hai, as well as his predecessors, were very are found in Lev. R. c. 6: 1'D:'nKZ bZIN

W11asinNtnnr1n ,n1

n nm ns nll 5nnK

tpl3Nn

'

:n

1ns Is

nlnrmr6a n i n11 mnnln

; Pes. R. c. 22 (ed. Friedmann, 113 b): ?tD~tp'l 81Tin 1~W1t tfl i nN bwr:wi 4* mnni: 311:m^ b 'In! rn nrnmprn t3Denwl ;PoD 'n

i r= G1n 14 p mow 1p bil wl nl "N9n ni1? nalwv wpinl nMpD rnnK nrnb 7ptnL n1 1DD333^9 Dtp nKm IsmD =tvw n i: I szn.

THE JEWISH

348

QUARTERLY REVIEW

careful in giving such a permission to claimants, and they would grant it only on the demand of orphans or their guardians to be used against anybody that concealed money entrusted to him by their father.268 (c) Excommunication. To enforce obedience to and acquiescence in all their decisions, the Bet-Din had only the ban at its disposal, by means of which the culprit was entirely separated from Jewish society. The Geonim, as the spiritual leaders of Jewry, were anxious to make the ban as effective as possible. The ban announced against some Jew used to be sent to all the communities of the district or the country wherein the person concerned resided. In this way, the effectiveness of the excommunication was to be secured. The utter separation from all intercourse with his co-religionists must have weighed heavily upon the excommunicated, especially in those times when a Jew almost exclusively moved in Jewish society. A full description of the extent of the ban is given in a responsum by R. Paltoi, 842-58 (5"', No. o1, and with some changes in "P., 75 a, No. I4).269 There was a milder degree of 268

izz% No.

Ssf-r4-,i y- r

22:

1nJS NFl nn

K1

lzN

1t9t

IlW14

.

.

N 1.-: N$N -i1: nnc) : =4 W nns i-in -in SN5 nN wsrnm $r ts innn

nus wiln ,-nN nN w3-=lN l

rnlN$$pminn

XnrruU$n Kpni pnnriw5$zlJw11n$

W412 iS

b'Y 'wI: 17''K.

Cp. VIM., No. 22, end, by Saadya. 269 The text in 5i". is more correct. Thus the terrible phrase '1pl3 'l1D11t in X'Wreads in 5" :-lnntl1D 1pr1 parallel to V'n11Y 11nn. With 5"J agrees the GaonicDocument published by Aptowitzer, ibid., 26, No. IV. The Karaite ban was likewise stringent. See Benjamin Nahavendi (nSI1N 2 a bottom) 'pj1N 3F '1n '55pD [ 1"' n5"l)] K'1:' 5 tl P=i,

si

i5se' 11~3mSv=

MS

12 tr'

nx nplt, 'nrTnn -f'1 tr

't 'f'

RESPONSA


349

excommunication, called n13 or snzWe, which enjoined the people to keep aloof from the excommunicated. The document called snTna, issued by the Bat-Din to this effect, was valid for thirty days (cp. n"r, Nos. 41-2, by R. Hai; n":, No. I82, and p. 357 note to p. 84; Gaonic Document, No. III, published by Aptowitzer, ibid., 26). If the excommunicated remained obstinate, the more severe form of excommunication, the so-called snnnns or tnn, was used. The effect of this ban must have been crushing, if carried out in all its severity. In all the synagogues of the neighbouring communities the ban was announced, declaring the food and drink of the culprit to be like that of a non-Jew and forbidding, under penalty of excommunication, any Jew from keeping company with the excommunicated person, or to circumcise his son, or to teach his children in the public schools, or, finally, to assist at the burial on the death of a member of his household. Sometimes the ban went so far as to declare those who ventured to talk to the person under the ban, as being eo ipso in his position (n"', No. 42, by R. Hai, and r"'l, No. 217). It would be unjust to attack R. Paltoi for this frightfulness of the ban (as Weiss, T"I't, IV, p. 15 top, note o1, and p. iI6, does), since R. Paltoi was not the inventor of this form of excommunication. It must have been in practice long before him (see also Gr. V4, I39, note 4). The ban was handled with as much severity also by the contemporary Christian ecclesiastical authorities in Babylon. In fact, it was in the general way of coercion in that period,

m1nnVs eN

1;,nn 5=pn n"î5s-

3

n7 nn 111wnMl I=me.

350

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY

REVIEW

and one person ought not to be blamed for not being above and beyond his time. In the time of R. Hai, the grim severity of the ban was somewhat relaxed. The Gaon is of the opinion that the new-born son of the excommunicated should be circumcised, and also that if the man died during the term of his excommunication, he should be buried (h"w, No. 41). It must be admitted that those affected by the ban suffered considerably under its weight. However, a strict handling of the ban, as the only means of coercion at the disposal of the Bet-Din, or of the communal leaders, was on the whole necessary for the preservation of the prestige of the authorities. This becomes evident when we consider in particular the ends which the ban served to attain. 4. The duties which were entrusted to the care of the Bet-Din in every community can be divided into two chief branches. The one consisted in the dispensation of justice in monetary lawsuits, while the other comprised the supervision of the practice of morality and religion by the masses. In carrying out their duties in both these spheres of activity, the Jewish courts must have made frequent use of the ban, in order to bring pressure to bear upon refractory people. (a) Monetary Affairs. The procedure of the Bet-Din in helping a creditor to recover his money in case the debtor declared his insolvency is fully described in a responsum by R. Natronai in "w',86 a, No. 15. Naturally, the procedure described in the Talmud served as an example for the Bet-Din in the Gaonic period. But nowhere in the Talmud is there to be found such detailed descriptions of the procedure of the Bet-Din as in the Gaonic responsa. To take the case of insolvency, the creditor


351

was entitled to recover his money from all those people who bought property from the debtor after the date of his loan. To this effect the Bet-Din would issue to the creditor a document of exactment, tFYU ntW,while destroying his original bond issued by the debtor. In case the people who bought the debtor's property refused to pay to the creditor his due, the milder form of the ban would be declared against them to be in effect for thirty days. If after this time the excommunicated persons persisted in their obstinacy, the severer form of the ban, the so-called tntMMN,was brought to bear upon them to last for the same time of thirty days. If this had no effect, the the allowed creditor to enter perforce B&t-Din finally the property of the buyers, and to appropriate with the help of the surveyors appointed by the lBet-Din, a part of the property covering the amount of his loan. To this while his 1snU wt effect, the creditor received Nnniw ntLW was destroyed. Finally, when already in possession of the property, the creditor received a deed of property signed The same by the Bet-Din in lieu of the ,n:rmsi'D. the case of a was use in in debtor procedure refusing to if he the left the before or court, appear country after an adverse decision of the Bet-Din (see the Gaonic Decrees and Documents published by Aptowitzer, yQR., N. S., IV-VI, 25-8; ,n", No. 234, by R. Hai). Several other instances of coercion by means of the ban in civil lawsuits are discussed in several responsa (cp. n", Nos. I84 and 233; V"', 77a, No. 32; 84b, No. 4, and 87a, No. I7). In short, the Bet-Din endeavoured to safeguard the just claims of people and to forestall any dishonest dealings. An interesting case is reported in Geon., II, I54, 1. I ff., about a debtor who tried to avoid paying his debts by VOL. X.

A a


352

attempting to give a bogus document of divorce to his wife, who in her turn would claim all the property of her husband for her Ketubah and in this way outwit the creditors. In this case again, the ban was useful for bringing pressure to bear upon the debtor.270 Of special importance was the duty of safeguarding the interests of orphans. The B&t-Din is styled 'the father of orphans'. Thus the Jewish court had to demand from the guardians accounts as to how they managed the affairs of orphans = No. 5, n"', entrusted to them (see n"r, No. 178 -Y'"1, No. 324, and n"`t, No. 217). No guardian could relegate his charge to other people without the permission of the Bet-Din (Geon., II, ioI (VIII)). In case there was no trustee appointed by the testator, the B6t-Din would appoint a respectable and worthy person to act as such NtIw, published by (cp. the Gaonic Document sN'nMs The Bet-Din further No. Aptowitzer, ibid., 29, IX). watched carefully over the credibility of witnesses who gave evidence before Jewish courts. If a witness was found out as having given false evidence, he was excommunicated, flogged, and publicly declared to be a false witness (see Y"m:,No. 88, end; pN",No. 3, by R. Nahshon; "p8,85 b, No. 13; 87a, No. i6; 88b, No. 22; 89 a, No. 5; 92 a, No. 42; 92 b, No. 45). In all cases such as discussed above, a firm handling of the ban was undoubtedly essential in order to secure honest dealing and general peace in the communiities. (b) Religious and Moral Supervision. In this sphere of activity we shall find instances of coercion by the B&tDin which appear excessively harsh to modern people. 270 nwnrS znm Nmawnnrw i:: 0,1F1 ninwa pvn :ny cn

o^r)'r U. mDn=.


353

We shall, however, see that some of these cases were due to the opposition of the Karaites. Religious practices, by themselves of minor or of no importance, became the battle-cry of the two opposing parties of Rabbinites and Karaites. The practice of quite an insignificant custom became the criterion of a man's adherence to the one or the other party. Accordingly, the Geonim acted as only partisans could act, and proceeded with great severity against those that showed the slightest sign of disloyalty to Rabbinism, as conceived by the heads of the Academies. As regards matters of public morality, it is well known that from times of yore the spiritual leaders of Jewry were very anxious to maintain the standard of purity of the Jewish home as high as possible. Accordingly, the Geonim were relentless in their severity against the offspring of illegal marriages, in order to prevent their mixing with the bulk of the people. These offspring were entirely excluded from the society of Jews, and were regarded as the outcasts of humanity (see the important responsum of R. Natronai in '"', 24 a and b, Nos. 7 and 1o, concerning the children of Jewish sectarians who desired to rejoin the general body of conforming Jews; ,n", No. 535, p. 264 top). We have seen above (p. 344) what a severe punishment was meted out in cases of adultery (cp. also Geon., II, I55, 1. 29). On the other hand, the B&t-Din was very careful in accepting any evidence which would cast a slur on the respectability of any Jew. No investigation was ordered by the B6tDin unless there were persistent rumours about a Jew's moral behaviour.271 Sometimes, in the case of evil rumours In1 Il:n T#V, 27 b, No. 38, by Natronai: rnnl1l 3 min rivWmvio Ni1 .. . n1inO 1p4N bw bi inprntmn tO 3 j,p,n :n 1l. tPrn mny 14n ^m53 l,*. m:1tn4l b;ilpw) Cp. n1/w, No. 7. 271

p 1myn 4nl tm^n1 Nlilv. Aa2

354

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

persistently recurring about certain people, the Bet-Din would act according to the Talmudic principle of ~i 1pIDt nilntn nmi sN. But the Bat-Din was very judicious in such matters. Under no circumstances would this principle be applied to a woman, in order not to cast a slur on her children (see n"', No. 179; 2"n, No. 94, by R. Natronai; Pardes, 25 b). In order to put a stop to rumours which malicious people were ready to invent and spread, the Bet-Din would order that flogging should be meted out to anybody that came singly with evidence against people in matters of morality and religion (n"', No. 8). According to Jewish law, the guilt of a man could not be established unless on the evidence of two people, whereas the testimony of one witness would serve no other purpose but to spread unsubstantiated rumours about innocent people. The religious supervision of the Bet-Din was variegated and many-sided. Sherira reports that already from early times the Bet-Din used to have a kind of secret police, who searched whether people did not hide anything containing leavened bread (rnn) during the festival of Passover.272 Owing to the opposition against the Karaites, the Geonim adopted a strict attitude in the case of some minor transgressions. Thus for doing work on the intermediate days of the Festivals ('ilrn ~in), excommunication as well as flagellation were meted out to the culprit.273 Ifl: 1n', No. 270, end: ',l t7p1 s1 l N1Hl -l1D'l 11t I-1 n Dr1i }I< -iinn 1ipTi irr'n iWvEv,nrnvw nni innon 4i-1 n Wi vO 1W D in:X snlwv Di v w nr7i j5 t7nn ;Kn 53n 272

m t:~D' DrSW'I1 tRy '';3KRil. jtt1, No. 216, probably R. Natronai, to whom probably the whole belongs: IWDYKtN rEpt 531 . . . group of responsa, Nos. 2I3-20,

,,.

273

WDNw lon K r pi WQ D 82N^ b3

D [4wi ani trI a 1 I wn I

D01pi?

RESPONSA

OF THlE BABYLONIAN GEONIM-MANN

355

The sam-e punishment was inflicted on one that married on a Festival or on inn ~irn(h"v, No. !zi8, end), or had his hair cut on *YThrn, or wore shoes during the seven days of mourning.27 To such length did this opposition against the K~araites go, that R. Natronal in a responsum enjoins that a Jew who does not eat warm food on the Sabbath, prepared in the traditional manner of lnutin, should be excommunicated from the Jewish community.275 This Gaon was particularly vehement in his opposition against the K~araites. In a passage preserved in V"it (ed. Warsaw, 37 b), we find R. Natronai giving vent to his strong feelings as regards those people who shorten the reading of the ilagada of Passover by leaving out the Agadic portions. By doing so, they were held to betray K?araiteleanings, since, as is well known, the IKaraiteswere opposed to the Talmud as a whole. Whoever changed the traditional text was in the eyes of the Gaon a heretic who should be excommunicated.27

274 275

.

,

,

See above, P. 343, note!265, end: h3)I)fl? M :N14"N fI'IV, No. 34 : Ir1lN '6

)'IN

~n,z iHz

*

note

*

T.

s

l-pi~l

~

,

zl

Nv

nri~vn)riHn ~n -ps4m

nt=71.

)

ZZCp.

imvn4-:- rm

Schorr, Hehaluz, XIII, 49,

356

THE JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

Apart from the zeal of the partisan, intolerance was rampant in those times within all religious communities. Even the Geonim were not free from this general foible. On the whole, the B&t-Din acted with strictness in cases of transgressions against important laws. For desecrating the Sabbath, which in olden times entailed capital punishment, the Geonim imposed the punishment of flagellation, and the culprit was publicly abused (n"w, No. 45, by Hai; cp. ~"W,91 b, No. 38). Similar was the case with a priest (,n:) who married one of the class of women prohibited to him in the Bible (cp. n"e, No. i80, by Sherira; ?"n, No. 88, by R. Samuel b. Hofni; -"in, II, 7, 11.11-15). Even if the priest renounced his priesthood, he would remain under the ban until he repented. From R. Hai's responsum in n'", No. 231, we gather that in his time there were many priests who married illegally and disobeyed the warnings of the Bet-Din.277 From a responsum in "'1zl, No. 103 (this detail is missing both in n"r, No. 142, and in Y5",No. 36), it seems that the ban could be extended even to a non-Jew in case he blasphemed the name of God. This ban was probably intended to prohibit Jews from having intercourse with the offending non-Jew. For further details about the use of the ban by the BMt-Din, see 3"n, No. i5, by R. Natronai = Geon., II, 30 ff., by R. Semah; a"n, No. 26, by R. 'Amram; and Gcon., II, 26 (II), by 277 Surprising is the statement of R. Semah, in rnW', No. 177, and D"l, No. 84, concerning a priest who married a woman that had been divorced: s n iY nrrnwm5 im WT )NI n rp" i) WnD wSr ,nD/1n D^Wn1 tnnrl

15

sw tIS pirtin nia iN Nirn . .. n'nn' D~'"' RS tan1n ,n' jpy3p1n*nThJn. Had the Bet-Din in those times the power of inflicting such punishment?

w?II

,n 1'SP Tiln,1Onn'D

r1;

RESPONSA

OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM--MANN

357

R. Nahshon. The general attitude of the Geonim in matters of religion and morality is well summed up by n tqm Sherira (n"5i, No. 44 = Geon., II, o26-7): n'aw, ,r 33 na Nl "I .,,+ 1 sin ^wn p ,13p ,Xn 53 p nlw;1.4 Another the branch to welfare of important 5. relating the communities, and which the Bet-Din had to attend to, was the maintenance of public order. Cases of insults and fights arising between people, included in the Talmudic term of nDo3pVt=, could, according to an old custom, be settled only by Jewish courts in Palestine (Baba kamma 84; cp.

"w, 29 a, Nos. I and 2).

However,

such a state of

affairs became dangerous to the peace of the communities in Babylon as well as in other countries outside Palestine since by being scot-free, violent people would frequently take recourse to insults and violence. Accordingly, the Geonim had to find some device of overriding the Talmudic rule of =n=nnrDp 4:: jplr: p1s. This they did by simply forcing the culprit, by means of the ban, to conciliate his victim. The Bet-Din could not impose the fine on account of the Talmudic law referred to. Thus they left'it to the culprit to come to an agreement with the person whom he made to suffer. As long as no such settlement was agreed to, the culprit would remain under the ball The first to introduce this device for the sake of public order and safety was R. Sadok of Sura, 823-5 (cp. '"w/, 29 a, No. 2, by R. Natronai; '"n, No. 60, and x"w, 31 a, No. 14, R.. Sadok's by R. Semah, probably of Sura, 882-7) was his followed Several successors. by practice responsa, dealing with cases of insults and personal injury, show us clearly the practice of the Geonim after R. Sadok (ren, No. 94, by R. Natronai; Pardes, 24d and 25a top, by R. 'Amram, 856-74, and R. Mattithiah, 861-9; s"', 29a,


358

by Sar Shalom, 849-53; cp. V"a, 29 b, No. 4).278 In IVI were attended to by the Palestine, however, these nMP01 Be't-Din even in the time of the Geonim. The Jewish judges used actually to fix the fine for insults and personal injuries.279 From responsa by R. Meshullam of Lucca we learn the interesting fact that in Italy and France, to which countries R. Meshullam in all probability sent his responsa, the Jewish judges used to fix the fines just as in Palestine. It seems that in these countries they took the Talmudic maxim of h31 rnup vir IN= "NM to refer only to Babylon, but not* to the other countries of the diaspora; whereas the Babylonian Geonim understood it to include Babylon 'and how much more the other countries' (nmrimiNxp'5zrn u"V 29 a, Nos. i and 3). Thus, in Italy and in France, they had no need of taking recourse to the device introduced by R. Sadok. There used to be fixed fines for insults. However, when the 'insult and damage were outrageous, the B6t-Din would considerably augment the fixed fine.280 There were sever-al other instances wherein the BettNo.

278

3,

See also DflZ Vy' 'IV" -' (1. c., No.

22):

5t

P llllt

V

M.N*

vi6r pW?V N

Cp. further, Iiefes b. Yasliah, ed. Halper, 2:22=JQR. N. S., V, AOOI 1. 12 ff. 279 Cp. Y% 3o a, No. 7: responsum from Palestine; 30 b, No. 13 . , ,; Pardes 24 d: MWD 110jZ Oltl 7V'1i, II, 34, No. I5: 4""C l l -ini t~l 1 bN #t z3'1 i . . . ,,,N jlu1 r ly nin I?1 'l)3:N y1=11) N)NI N1 I VV It11bb1)N-r~yz ,*. nlwri)

n~wvrw~

,, Iny inim M~vv280 Cp. P"), No. 125;

.*n*n izrIvii*i No. 44.

1W11 No.

235 =

innnr imrnnti"4

"'Vi 31 a,

rim

No. i6:

vrniopImrNanz

~znv I*

See also

1"1,


359

Din imposed its decision by means of the ban. To a very good purpose was this coercion exercised by the Bet-Din, e.g. in the case of a woman who demanded her divorce after her husband-in those days of polygamy-added another wife to his household as a rival to his first wife ('"rV, 67b, No. 60). Sometimes it would happen that though the married life became intolerable, a husband would refuse to grant divorce unless his wife renounced her claims upon the Ketubah (y"', i5 a, No. 27 = 69 b, No. 74; cp. n"a,Nos. 319 and 345). In all like cases, the Bet-Din compelled the husband to grant the divorce. Moreover, if a husband left for abroad without providing for his wife, the Bet-Din used to sell a part of his property for the maintenance of his wife (cp. "t', 63 b, No. 38, by R. Paltoi). R. Hai reports that there existed a covenant strengthened by a ban not to divulge the secrets of mysticism to unworthy people.281 On the whole, in order to assert its prestige, the Bat-Din usually made use of the ban. Above (p. 34I), mention was made of the fact that if, e.g., a Jew took an oath not to obey the summons of the judges of his community, he would be coerced by means of the ban to forgo his oath. However, we learn from the responsa that in some communities the Bet-Din was unable to enforce its ruling on the members of the community (cp. above, pp. I43-4; n"1S, No. 153, by some Spanish or French scholar). 6. The last paragraph of this chapter will deal with the powers invested with the Exilarchs in Babylon as well as with the communal leaders outside Babylon. Sherira in his Letter (p. 33) tells us that during the reign of the 281

Nos. 29 and 3I; rn'w, No. 14: No,s

'l\ 4NS1Wtn3nd Jriln 12 m1W)

nsi

lT

nn D:I MM

2

,t,

nDnr plNW. 5 KNSK

QUARTERLY REVIEW

THE JEWISH

360

Persians the Exilarchs used to wield great power with the help of the secular authorities. The Exilarchs retained this influence for a long period after the advent of the Muslims. It was only in the time of David b. Yehuda that the Exilarchs lost much of their prestige by being deprived of the Caliph's support.282 What this reduction of power amounted to, is explained by a statement of an Arabic writer, Othman al-Gahiz (died in 869), published by Goldziher, RAy., VIII, I2 if. This writer, who probably refers to the conditions that existed in his time, states that 'neither the Catholics nor the Exilarch have the right in the Muslim Empire to condemn any of their respective co-religionists to imprisonment or flagellation. They possess only the power of excommunication.' But it has been sufficiently shown in the preceding pages (p. 342 ff.) that the Bet-Din continued to inflict the punishment of flagellation, and even imprisonment, down to the time of the last Geonim (cp. also Weiss in tn1in n':, V, 268). Possibly before the change referred to above, the secular authorities would assist the Bet-Din, through the intervention of the Exilarch, in carrying out its decisions even in religious matters. Whereas in later times, a culprit could seek protection with the secular authorities, in order to escape flagellation (see above, p. 122-3). Thus it resulted that the only means of coercion at the disposal of the Bet-Din was the ban. A culprit would remain 282 S.1n,

nQD?I

Nf:

1i Wn16

nn nl

n,wfl ln5w1 V r=h i n^

r

'iI-m

n nNslis wn TNr :SlNrvnW

4v

WKiN:1

n.=m.,

+

^D:Dr

3 n Nv3w' '4v YYn ., . . w5 4:t 11 '11 DI N'KnliDW jD '15DnW'. .. Cp. Gr. V4, 445 f. According to Barhebraeus this happened in 8a5, during the reign of the Caliph Maamun, Nmr{,t i(u.. i,rl,l)

813-33.


36I

under the heavy burden of excommunication as long as he did not submit to the flagellation imposed by the Jewish authorities. As regards the powers of the Exilarchs after the curtailment of their influence, we learn from Nathan's well-known report that the Exilarch David b. Zakkai wielded great authority, and that he was greatly assisted by the Caliph's authorities (Neub., II, 86, see 8I bottom). In view of all this evidence, the above statement of Othman al-Gahiz cannot be accepted without certain qualifications, at least as far as it refers to the Exilarch. Very little is known of the procedure the Jewish communities, both in Babylon and in the other countries of the Diaspora, adopted in appointing their communal representatives. Whereas it is known that the Exilarch, as well as the Academies, appointed judges to officiate in such Babylonian communities as were under their jurisdiction, it is nowhere mentioned that the Exilarch could, for example, foist his nominees upon the communities to occupy the office of 'heads of the community', lw' ,npn, whom Nathan mentions in his Report (Neub., II, 85-6). Interesting is the fact that a certain Nagid of Egypt in an account of his installation (published by Mr. E. N. Adler, 7QR., IX, 717-I8) states that he is holding his office with the permission of the Exilarch HIisdai.283But this Exilarch (also styled Nasi) probably resided either in Palestine or in Egypt. There is at present no further material available to give us a clear idea about the authority the Exilarchs possessed over the Jewries outside Babylon. ,283

n:Nr nv6 niwrhn

wan

l:znr

Wrin

'Innm 7 DoY mnYv

':N '01

wnrIl=7s NniKzwptnne 15I:n InI'Dn D:v nnn n,): 5snlW i5: =1'Z4 ln)iWn. See Kaufmann,JQR., X, 163-4; on the Nagid in general, see Neubauer, JQR. VIII, 551-5. See also Pozn., Babyl. Geoiirm, 112-13,

362 ~TIlE, JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

362

In Gaonic documents addressed to Jewish communities the commiunal representatives are mentioned in the following order: 'the scholars, the judges, the heads of the community, the learned of the community, the scribes, the Parnasim, other communal workers, and the pupilteacher's '*. Aptowitzer has already pointed out that Graetz (V4, 139) was wrong in making the Parnasim (r Drz~i)the heads of the community, whereas they are mentioned only after the communal scribes. Another mistake of Graetz, which Aptowitzer omitted to point out, is to take -nnz1, mentioned in '"o' to m-ean 'the electors' of the commiunity (Borrerimi, m4ni) who, according to Graetz, elected the heads of their community 'in accordance with sorme unknown system of franchise'. The parallel 284

Gaonic Documents published by Aptowitzer, JQR., New Series,

IV, 2-6,Nos. III and IV: [4 2J 4:11 (~ 11)111Pni~l

~

4ln

ojn4-ti

Z) NIIV1~'f~M'1r 4)471N Nrv

The parallel in V"

vNX-11n:M v) 14 reads : lls)=~*W"1~ nin Cp. Aptowitzer's remarks, PP. 4i1 2.-Ben Meir addresses the Babylonian communities as follows (RP_IJ., XLII, i8o, 1. 24 ff.): 1Y;Th4nl~rlpliniZ1

75 a, No.

Of interest is the documientof appointing a president (VN'I) of a community as preserved in Albarceloni's YI'rIVV 'D (eP. vol. VII,, 462, note 7). It seems to me that Albarceloni fouindthis document already in Saadya's work. 1 = 'N' Brit. Mus. Add. :27,1i81, fol. 26 a, reads,: ~1I1,1 J" fl1?DY i;n r'lI (ed. Halberstar-n(Bodl. 89o) reads '?Z) i3 ~'NVzl ~rr)T 4 * ** 'Nlri n4:pwt-MPIMr-II ?i'IVrll* rlvIr; 27 a bott. : -iv1

*

, ~l~~X;p.

8:

NV=h~

SD~~f jw

ImmNf


in Aptowitzer's

363

Gaonic Documeznts which reads '1mDl

makes it clear that tnn:5l in

".' is nothing

else but the

correct form for the more usual jnS=5 (librarius = n35), scribes! Interesting details about the internal organization of the Jewish community in Egypt are given by Gottheil (7QR., XIX, 499-501) in extracts from the work of al-Kalkashandi (d. 824 A.H.) who in his turn has as his authorities writers of the eighth century A.H. As the period dealt with in our present treatise ends about o050, al-Kalkashandi's statements cannot be discussed here fully. I should only like to point out that the distinction al-KIalkashandi draws between the Hazzan, who 'must be well versed in preaching' and who 'ascends the Minbar (= Almemar) and exhorts them (i.e. the people)', and 'the Sheliah-Zibbar, i.e. the Imam who leads them in prayer', is not borne out by Jewish-Arabic writers in Egypt. Thus, e.g., Maimonides in an Arabic responsum (published by Friedlaender, 7QR., N. S., V, 7 ff.) uses the terms "Inand x"w promiscuously

for the reader.

On special occasions, the Geonim invested the communal leaders with great authority. When the Jewish community of Nefusa (cp. above, VII, 484) was reorganized after the town had been sacked, many communal questions demanded settlement. A matter that called for particular attention was the fact that all the Ketubas were burned. This gave rise to many disputes as to the amount of dowry each woman claimed, especially since many women had the amount of their dowries twice or three times overestimated in their Ketubas. The Gaon R. Hananiah, 938-43, advised the communal leaders to convene a meeting for estimating each woman's dowry according to the

THE JEWISH

364

QUARTERLY REVIEW

economic position of her husband. These resolutions were then to be enforced by means of the ban.285 Likewise, for the purpose of obtaining a true estimate of each member's taxing capacity, and in this way a just distribution of the taxes that were imposed upon the whole of the community, the leaders used to announce a ban against those that made false statements about their economic position (cp. _"l'm, No. 205). Usually in the communities where there existed a Bet-Din, conjoint proceedings would be taken by the Bet-Din and the communal leaders. In places where no permanent Jewish courts were established, the communal leaders, probably conjointly with the scholars of the town, settled monetary disputes and cases pertaining to public order. In the responsa that deal with these cases ,np usually stands for the communal leaders (cp. p"~,No. I125; '" , No. , 7; No. 4; n"i, No. 346, sent to 84 IKairowan in 99I; cp. ibid., I79, note I). In 1"', No. 82, there is mentioned the case of some Jews giving evidence before the ,npto the effect that certain of their co-religionists spoke heresy. One of the suspected takes the oath to prove his innocence. R. Aaron, Gaon of Pumbedita, 943-61, concludes his responsum ('"n, No. 37) with the demand that the elders should, on receipt of his responsum, meet for the purpose of reading the Gaon's answer and acting n i nD nw mn npn n ' .,, p ' 46 pn tnrnnnnna1prilnn n SDS vwyn mnrt:nun: pyrnr 4v 1 m1t. 3pyNi, t, ,il ,^Mt 46 l It Dnnl 4T1-gl 1Irwy 1)vY 285

lnrw

N tn uaDW pin1 nis5 m. n nN InvW K CW i n Im 8 rtwla Inlln1 inn r I, ni i'Z5 nrnv nipn pn 1 p r nnli-W l I-ii nlDyri 4:pT bl'Yy 1nv nSpn ipn* rl pl

1pi4v ipri

Np y4

1n1NIM , Dz

.

, .1ij)nv

nnD n4iy 4)n nN.


365

in accordance with its contents. Usually the communal leaders had the supervision of the charitable legacies (see above, p. 341). In n"inD, No. 173, there are mentioned communal workers who looked after the poor in their

tolw niltnl ~y.. ,.).2S6 y lnpipD3 Interesting is the custom of whole communities binding themselves by means of an oath or a ban, publicly announced, to adhere to some institution agreed upon for the communal welfare, or not to use the public funds until they reached a certain amount. Sometimes it would happen that the new institution could not be followed by the majority of the community; or, to take the second case, that some important events demanded the immediate use of the communal funds. In such eventualities, the Geonim were consulted as to how to dispose of the incubus of the oath or the ban entered upon by the community on an earlier occasion. Usually the Geonim allowed the community in question to alter its decision in accordance with the pressing requirements of the changed conditions (see n"', Nos. 33, I39, and 339; 5 , No. 4I; D"n, No. 116/. community

(. , ,n.

286The Bet-Din possessed also the right of supervising the communal charitable legacies, probably conjointly with the heads of the community (cp. 1?"'1~, No. I62, and "W, 83 a, No. 22).

(Concluded.)

ADDENDA TO 'THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM AS A SOURCE OF JEWISH HISTORY' (JQR., N. S., Vols. VII-X) BY JACOB MANN, Baltimore. OWING to conditions in consequence of the War the instalments of my treatise appeared at intervals of considerable length. In the meanwhile further reading as well as research among the Genizah manuscripts suggested a number of additional remarks which could not be inserted in the proofs without much derangement. VII, 465. About the Gaon Natroi from Bagdad see also Briill (7ahrbiicher, II, 146, note), who writes that he could not have hailed from this town since it was only founded later on by al-Mansuir. Therefore Sherira (in his Letter) defines the locality as 'from the Bridge' (rnnvnrnj;) or 'from the outer Bridge' (:n mn,mnnp;), i.e. the eastern bank of the Tigris. But that there was a Bagdad in the neighbourhood prior to al-Mansur is evident from the fact that already in 750 c. E., we find in Fustat a 'head of the congregation', Abu-'Ali Hasan of Bagdad (?m1i:n t, see above, VII, 477). See also Houtsma's Encyclopedia of Islamn,I, 564, col. i, s. v. Baghdad, 'The 'Arab authors are also quite explicit that al-Mansuir'sfoundation must not be 433

THE 434

434

JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

considered as an entirely new settlement of a hitherto uninhabited district. They mention a whole list of preMuhammedan places which had gradually arisen in the area filled by the 'Abbasid capital. The most important of these was Bagddd, a village of Christians on the western bank of the Tigris'. VII, 468 f.; VIII, 348 f. The Exilarch seems to have resided in the quarter of al-'Atik~ah in Bagdad. Thus we read in the account of the inner organization of the schools (in Neub. II, 78, 11.4-5) D3Villn M2V1' 4Vl "IM4~JON -T1V1 As ~2f1stands here fur Bagddd (see also above, VII, 466), there is little doubt that by rijMrw r-w the above quarter is meant. Likewise in Nathan Habbabli's report of the recognition of Daniel b. Zakkai as Exilarch by the Gaon Kohen-Sedek and his school we read (I. c., 8o, 11. 3-4),

v-m i N-yi- ,N A highly interesting responsum by Hai 1 (preserved in I, 63-4; shortened in nrnn n"~r,6i b) tells us about v"'f' the residence of the Pumbedita Geonim in Bagdad, i~n n

Hoisz A4raic namewas AbczBish,sis evidentrmnaz NoJ2')hre-iny h theo wrtrmntosta

ic (T..S ArabZ

Niii nyz -1i

in v

n

inm

4z pt

it"in

letter iN Jewish etaeitet nil)

iiN

THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM-MANN

435

1 o n,o S^ }paw 02 rinN&. N OnNsN ntr rrpnw, O-n; Accordingly the first Pumbedita Gaon to live in the 'Abbasid capital was Hai b. David (890 C.E.) who acted there as Dayyan several years previously. The reason for this change of residence is not known. Anyhow we find the later Pumbedita Geonim in Bagdad, where no doubt the school, still going by the name of Pumbedita, also found a home. That Kohen-Sedek lived in Bagdad appears from Nathan's account of Nissi-al-Nahrwani's visit to him in the n,r^ ni-'w.n , middle of the night (1.c., 79, 1. 25 f., nnia rm MWW DM1wam nnWMn 3an:D MaI=rnnrwy

rniznlm anr n wn

V1rN ?nTy?

nr,hn

n Ii n i: inniN nnDa wnviznz^wn Py i) wi yrivnw mn-D:-' iniN YDniw'Si Iv. But the Arabic text,

7QR., XVII, 755, 1. I9, has no reference to the locality). Probably Yehudah Gaon, Sherira's grandfather, meant Bagdad when instructing the Jews of Khurasan to follow -nwD :: (above, VII, 471, note 15). Nehemia's as well as Sherira's residence in Bagdad was discussed above. As to Hai, it should be added to the data given before (see also above, p. 422) that Masliah b. al-Basek, Dayyan of Sicily, visited the Gaon in the 'Abbasid capital, and on his return presented to the Nagid Samuel ibn-Nagdela a sketch of Hai's life (,n 'I ,nnD,see Steinschneider, fiid. Zeitsc/zrift, II, 30I-4, and Arab. Liter., ? 85). Masliah reports that during one of Hai's lectures the difficult verse of Ps. 141. 5 was discussed, and the Gaon asked him to go to the Katholikos and inquire of him its meaning. As is well known, the Katholikos of the Christians in 'Irak resided in Bagdad. Also Elhanan b. Shemarya visited the school there as we read in an interesting letter (printed in RET., LV, 49-5I, see above, VII, 481) ,nrn , rDn Qm 1rn t ~1

g nt ipnN m:p n inD

a

ny

=: nr:rno (i. e. Hai's)

436

436 THE

JEWISH

QUARTERLY REVIEW

As a resident of Bagddd Hai mentions in his responsa Jfl?' local customs. See V"'V, L, 89 21, I~'3~ ~ ~K-vl1-1 J:1 fl-; II 73-4, 1)J*1VM~ i,NNnai-m

~

(There is no doubt that IIN "I' is a corruption for Peroz-Shahur = Nehardea, as already Bamberger, pv jpnr,note 73,5-,remarks.) Burial at Nehardea must have been regarded as a great honour.

/1'13'

3 I'

10z

i nvvz~n.

Probably in V'V I, 23, ~nzrr.o

=~nzIw

z-

o

/Izl nvjp, a Bagddd custom is meant. Both R. Semahi and R. 'Amram maintain that neither nj1) In nor ~Irllzn31X?

in '1V Nt1 be said, but Hai quotes the Bagddd custom of omitting the first only. See also 'Ittur, II, 45 c, top,

Nehardea, as the district including Pumbedita, is sometimes mentioned where we should expect the latter. See Gr., V4,~444, note i , and z".i2no. 44 (cited above, VJJ, 467).3 ? , mentioned 2 He is probably identical with 1 oN~ ;Nvv~56 pm in a Genizah fragment containing several decisions of Babylonian Geonim (JQR., IX, 689). Abraham b. Solomon cites an explanation of his, together with Hai Gaon's (Hebr. Bibliogr., XX, 9). See also above, P. 42I. 3See also 'MO (ed. Venice, ii6o8, fol. 10,2 d, top) 5v J1..fln 1111MZ * IM N11'12

::21 r. -?1D) 'It IMZI

11V'=

(65r c. E. =) n11LVb


437

In Khalaf b. Sarjado's lampoon against Sa'adya (Harkavy, n 11p nSnn Stud. u. Mittei., V, 230) we read, .NKn1K xvi :na n^PnI ;%wn, nw is nVlvwn mlnn n&m= (or D:N:) wm^ N^p s]N vilpn 4:n: in wnyx nnn nnW nwvm l1wi IP:

1[ wd=ln 1~: Ntinm3. These scurrilous attacks seem to refer to Sa'adya's enforced stay in Bagdad after he had left Sura owing to his conflict with David b. Zakkai. rn,l:InIx,W I take to mean the Sura school, whither reports of Sa'adya's irn: doings reached. By lrmvn apparently the disciples of the Pumbedita school, situated then in Bagdad, are meant. Likewise Shemarya b. Elhanan was lnrm n"nl w'n under Sherira (above, VIII, 352). Perhaps the responsum from Bagdad (above, IX, I45-6) emanates from Sa'adya during his stay there. Its tendency to combat KIaraism by deducing several Rabbinic laws from the Bible is quite in agreement with the whole attitude of this powerful defender of Tradition, Sa'adya. But Hai b. David could just as well have been its author, since under him the Pumbedita school was transferred to the 'Abbasid capital. Albeck in his new edition of Haeshkol (pp. 6, note i8, and 73, note 4) speaks of a school with Geonim in Bagdad apart from those of Sura and Pumbedita. In the Introduction, c. 6 (which is inaccessible to me and has probably not been published yet), he promised fully to substantiate his opinion. But the data, discussed here, prove clearly N nm nw: ins . m*n^ np nWK,: S5U :n IniK Kn3tn \W-v K ,~nnmnmn nwmn m K'mnnN3r'KKN4piNmnpn? t6 n5Iryn:n 'KD = rh4 -n nz. rpmn nw^ ppsmn p';1 Nyrnin Nnwnn pN mnain Nnn S3 ,ni mrnl Nn nean

Kt8 Kti . iYnn rnn3n -nF6 wn

(r. SC'ID) KniD'I xnrTn1Dr.There is no doubt that Nehardea stands here for Pumbedita, as its Gaon, together with the principal of Sura, decided upon the change in the law of n1lTn see also Graetz, v4, 401.

(see also above, X, I22).

About the date 651 c. E.

THE JEWISH

438

QUARTERLY REVIEW

our contention that the school of Pumbedita found a new home in Bagdad. This removal took place, as Hai tells us, during the Gaonate of Hai b. David (890-8 c. E.).4 VII, 47I. Jews from Khurasan visited the Khazar dominion. See the fragment published by Schechter 3' i1 nnn rn, (_QR., N. S., III, 206, 11.36-) m^,nKlt orn

zN n4n=

n

iptnnm

vm

4iz j3l4m i'nnl

n'N"nl

jiD

D.

VII, 480; VIII, 350. Elhanan b. Shemarya received from Hai a pamphlet explaining the difficult words in 'Aboda zarah (see Steinschneider, H. B., IV, 107; Yiid. Zeitschr., I, 313, note zo). VII, 484-5. The whole community of Fez seems to have been deported to Ashir. This we learn from the correct text of MS. Parma (given by Lewin, ahlrb. d.jiid.liter. Gesellsclh., VII, 254) Dpnvinn DK Snp 1rwW nl5tv Ir '11 KN,nw 1=ns< 4Qn. The responsum was written by Hai

and thus begins, ~5 iw D,Non

v 1N,nwK ''n1 'nz

nnm:n 4s4rN

in~nn wi, Kn,w 1.n,',tN2a' : n ,n1

mnnv *nnm pi,"rnnin wn"? mt0o DNr nr,'u . Accordingly, vnt is nivnanic

not a geographical name but an adjective referring to the people of Fez, who are complimented as 'good, superior, select, &c.' This responsum was written during the Kallah of Adar I298 Sel.=987 c. E. Probably Samuel b. Hofni's letter to Fez (see above, VII, 485, note 3I) refers to the 4 Hai in his famous responsum about mysticism and *practical Kabbalah' (in D'p!t tDl't, 56, top), after referring to the amulets which the Sura Gaon, Moses Hakkohen, 832-43, was reported to have made frequent use of, writes

n11=i:! 3 l3 n

lt31 lt K-lD nnwrn n tz Qn111 64 i 1=1Cnp b; 3. Here Babylon is not Bagdad but the old 1mn1 min'1 Dtn D^pnl Babylon in which neighbourhood Sura was (see also Graetz, v4, 445). Besides, in the time of Moses Hakkohen the school was still situated in Pumbedita. Probably by the statement 'and we (were) far from it', the Gaon means the school over which he presided.


439

persecutions prior to the expulsion of the local Jews to Ashir, whither also Jews from Tlemsen were compelled to depart. In this epistle Samuel's son, Israel, is already mentioned as the secretary of the school (see VIII, 364, and also above, p. 414). Hai styles himself in the above responsum as 'Dayyan of the Gate'. We know from Sherira's letter, written in the same year, that Hai became Ab Bet-Din about two years previously (Neub., I, 41, 1iw ;lnn

ni'w n ;"n n,I nl3: 3 iMz

nr,h :DD,1i).

A clear

proof that the Ab of the school is identical with its :X:31N4'n (see above, X, 339, and also Mann, 1. c., vol. I, 273, top).5

Of Sherira and Hai's correspondents in Fez two are mentioned by name. They were the brothers Abraham and Tanhum, the sons of Jacob. T.-S. 13 F 21 (paper, square hand, size 104 x 7 inches) contains on verso the beginning of Maimonides' Introduction to his Mishneh Torah. On recto there is a great deal of scribbling. Thus the poem in honour of Maimonides' work,;lwr nn3 13 ' r I) is (see Steinschneider's ,in,n min, no. 18, in V y3p, in times. But the scribbling the beginning repeated four of a pamphlet of responsa has been preserved. It reads, 6 64V -wl 1i4N nlrtw n inl ,nirl in* D nnwl pinp 16 3n - ywn r m 'v Dn 1nri n'i#= nribv raw n3nDn 30n nnv w K:8U l:5MlhW t33 ':''a nzzn 1::InS nn n 3py p.s n3" WK'I iz3

i<m-privir 4l"rn

wvnW in;:nrN -nnn 3pp' iaK

n3wr

bDpr (B. b. Ioob).

This

l Dnni " N (there follows the usual formula) n3n K;pn3Rn n1lyn 5w nrn n.ity i3p 15niily5 '3n$

heading is repeated on the same page in the scribbling in a somewhat shortened form. 5

Against Eppenstein in Graetz, V4, I34, note 5.

THE JEWISH 440

440

QUARTERLY REVIEW

A highly interesting letter from R. Hai to these brothers in Fez, dated Adar 26th (1)35 Sel. = I004 C. E., iS preserved in T.-S. 12~. 829. Unfortunately the epistle is damaged and very faded. I give here what could be safely deciphered. The address (verso) reads mn: mnm -it ni -i 4:i

01113N ):1I

vinm in the second column is a slip for "PVas is evident from- recto. Besides the Hebrew address there is one in is still visible. The Arabic wherein the word JU.6t6.W1 epistle was probably sent in the first instance to Fustdt for transmission to Fez (cp. above, VIII1, 3.55 if.). (recto)

IN

*

*

,*(8)

(4)*

.

nivzo-nN

r)

i~ r~in nn~

nz4

1V

nr npvp

MN-IN N n6N

N

There follow five more lines, very faded. On line 14 we


read 31t

fl]l? 901V i

P 911z

441

IwNn *4ivzo. The

epistle is continued on verso where nine lines are given. On 1.8 there is mentioned ri~ t5, nnv "a 01 _i,z n. hm n p mr It concludes (1. 9) Zn V rre' rM' %rtN i5 uijn nnnn'I iR. Hai previously wrote to his friends in Fez through 'Amran Hallevi b. Hillel, evidently enclosing responsa on three questions. He also refers to a pamphlet of other responsa. A letter reached him from Abfi'l Faraj Alluf (no doubt identical with the Alluf (= Resh Kallah) Abfi'1 Faraj Joseph b. Jacob b. 'Aukal of Fustt.4 who was a great patron of the Babylonian schools, see above, VIII, 357-8) containing the sad news of the demise of the famous Jacob b. Nissim ibn Shahtin 6 of Kairowan to whom Sherira sent his well-known Letter.7 This report caused the Gaon 6 R. Hai spells the name 'llKN' and not NINV. About the meaning of the latter see Rappoport, '41 "I n11'6I, notes 2 and 6, and Steinschneider, JQR., XI, 614. 7 Numerous responsa were sent to this scholar by Sherira and Hai (see the list in Pozn., '41V no. 26). To these T.-S. 8 G 73 (two paper leaves, damaged, size 7 x 5 inches) should be added. On fol. i, recto, top, the passage of Ta'anit 12 a, from )4Vy twjp K N nflfl 'f~z ?Nm nn till J is as rr wnn NVT.1 (text). Then we have the n given ' explanation (N'V1~) for which the following responsum, dated gg9 C E.. is ~ 1NZ'V 1 It 1 Il quoted: 1'14V fl? 1 nm ii nlIn zli I'MT~- nixXvvl . t n:v 4:Nrrii, awm -la nr)v -InN

'In 1:1i-1e In

IN f wvn I. (15Y= is explained as prayer, as also adopted by R. Hlananel and Rashi a. 1. The latter also mentions another Explanation which, however, his inaster did not accept, " ?V54-nKN N:4 Vlln 4Z' "M . . . il'.) The responsum is continued till 1. 9 of fol. i, verso. p On 1. io ff. another responsum is given. t'ti

~n 4ew[na

bN] nynnz minnn ntom p i4nmiy[n] xvvip v:N~ There follows the whole 014 D'1 rW3n 1'i3V .l]. Y14h' K explanation of the passage, ending on fol. 2, recto, bottom. It seems that some time after R. Jacob b. Nissim's inquiry, the Kairowan scholars again VOL. XI. H h


442

great grief like on the days of national misfortune and calamity. He held memorial services for the departed scholar at the academy and also before the congregation, probably in one of the synagogues of Bagdad. His sermon moved the audience to tears. Considering the time that must have elapsed till the news of R. Jacob's demise reached Fustat and thereupon transmitted to Bagdad, the Kairowan scholar must have died early in the summer of I003 C. E. We read also of a donation of 70 Dinars (for the school) which a certain Khaluf b. Joseph sent. Solomon b. Hakim is perhaps identical with the signatory of a document, dated I030 C. E. at Fustat (Bodl. 28054). Another responsum of R. Hai to Fez is mentioned in T.-S. 20. 91, dealing with the Talmudic law of inheritance, we read nDK iX j4 -lm i~s 3i nK' ml1 'lK nNten ... nn,= IMnsi [n,n]n 6nn KI1 n:",: 1,D=: nnwv (r. in=) ,nwK i KNnT, i=-w n-W,t. nn:,n Nm wt,1n i:'Nt ip= riS: onm 't

wherein

"1N

19

i3' DN1 3m

'm '::p s5 nn,i

r pn

i,p p"n ,nn,:n in; -in5

nsS~re,n= i.m r:! ,n ^N

I nD

nn zn

.

inquired of R. Hai the meaning of this passage. Sherira was probably no longer alive then. The copyist. who had Hai's original letter before him, was Joseph Rosh Hasseder b. Jacob Rosh be-Rabbanan of Fustat who flourished at the beginning of the thirteenth century (see the colophon in Bodl. 262417,and also above, p. 426). He was an author of standing, but still more a prolific copyist of other people's literary productions, ranging from Talmud and Commentaries to Gaonic Responsa, Sa'adya's Siddur, and other liturgical works, Maimonides' writings, philosophy, medicine, and astronomy. The Cambridge Genizah Collection contains a vast number of leaves in Joseph's handwriting which none who went through this Collection could fail to notice. The identification of the above responsa as having been copied by him rests on my recognition of his handwriting. It should be added that T.-S. I3 F 21 (described above, p. 439) is also his copy. Very likely Bodl. 287844, containing Geonic Responsa, are also in Joseph's hand, because we have a similar superscription as above, '"l1 W 11 NP 11W '"PI 1h11

unnnn r,n,imynU

D>:n Di n,npnyln . l;mip '=~ l,':.% t; i t [, n].

443


VII, 483-5. Of other North-African communities who had relations with Sherira and Hai are known Kabes, Tahort, and Sejelmessa. T.-S. io0 G 55 contains the tops of two leaves, brownish paper. On fol. i, recto, the following can be read in large handwriting: I wnnn 65[v] Ml *11

(verso) .

* r21

[nno]

n~)

~fls4w

. .

[:]I

z-

rv

nri

~v I [4noz ....I ?'Ilvil 'IM Verso pNVN evidently contained an index (fihrist) of the respoi-isa. The pamphlet dealt at the beginning with a scroll of the Law. 'in In6 the usual formula. The beginning of this heading 4 Iof a new pamphlet is not preserved. Nn t~n r Verso evidenitly is the conclusion of the

'1I~ 1"N

pamphlet.

14-H

i:

nx

~

nrnnNrnT

4

A responsum of Hai to IKabesis mentioned in V"'e,LI114. His responsum to Sejelmnessa concerning the consumption of dead locusts is also cited by Samuel b. Jacob ibn Jama' in his treatise on Shehita (Steinschn., _7iid.Zeitschr.,I,3, 1 3 note i 8 ; see A rab. L iter., ? 15.5). VII, 487. About Natronai's connexions wit'n Lucena see also 'Amnrarn'sSiddur, i a, fl1V1njIn rVMIMrlixt ~N 1-~

Probably the following responsa by this Gaon were also sent to Lucena. tVt',v II, 20, Znzvil" 9)

IlN

Hh

2

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY

444

REVIEW

Ibn Gayyat, as the Rabbi of Lucena, mentions the local correspondents of Natronai as' our early (scholars) ' About Lucena see also Harkavy, bJ'w nwmn, VII, 25 .(in Hebrew Gr., IV). See further, p"'D, I, 42 a nv't KNr '1m1i:n.

WVODDN3

: 111n jlm3

'wriU

- 1.

Sicily should be added to the European countries which had connexions with the Babylonian Geonim. Naturally Masliah b. al-Basek (above, p. 435) kept up correspondence with Hai. A question of his to the Gaon is expressly mentioned (yiid. Zeitschr., II, 303-4). VII, 489. An interesting statement about the Jews of Wadi'l Kura' in post-Gaonic times is to be found in Abraham ibn Megas's n,SK n1:l: (printed in Constantinople, 1585, cited in H.B., XIX, 42) (!)"-~'zao5 '

, v, m,vw anW1 nr1 m,lZDD,n 3ml -n, w

. r'n ,~ny, ns

Ni3

v nnv 31n3 wrn, sn&< K1

nK 5m i viV -1331InN

(!) 'F-lpwSK JK1 pi1

wvr

Q ,D nnnK n13 ini1n KNlim

n,=, ,w '175n n~ IID D3 iVlpiu

z v ins nl DWv l 1?D3 (r. nsn: 's5I3)nn3 p"nm9]s 13n:nnv nwenu3=' nS131. ns s,W3 n,l5 3'p13. VIII, 340. On the variant names Sadok and Isaac for the same Gaon, see also Zunz, Ritus, I85. It should be noted that two more people have the name Isaac in front of their names. The Pumbedita Gaon Semah (either b. Paltoi, 872 C.E., or b. Mar R. Kafnai, 935) is syled in ~D-inn ,top (ed. Amsterdam, 9a) as Isaac Semah, 1K5s n 3i1zlpp jlK: (r. n;w4) rzwnvvKN n y3nm '1.3 NnKn3^?

nprn.

Also an Exilarch Hezekiah in 1055 C.E., perhaps the K nrrm pnx successor of Hai, is mentioned as n5 WKn 1nI -n 1 If note it be a not mere RAj., LXVIII, 42, (see i). coincidence, why just the name Isaac? A re-examination of T.-S. i2. 856 revealed the fact that the correspondent of Nahshon Gaon b. Sadok was called


445

:,WV(1. I, read [:]z:v wni1'). He was a prominent scholar in Kairowan. Nahshon's son, Hai (Gaon of Sura, 889-96 C.E.), evidently also corresponded with this scholar. T.-S. I2. 77 contains a very damaged vellum fragment, brown, square writing, forming a portion of a Gaonic responsum. (evidently end of question) uvi'm I .ntDS . (r., 1. 5) 14n m n nvwn;w n3rwn[-P]nmnn (6) [-n irml n In pIa ib3vW l^,D 1p"D [nniN]W Irt rbwN (7) [n:n:8 Mlp] itr >TDr l . (v., I. 5) M , . ,'t1 .i [n]nvomi1U:35' . 3'f:nn l MD=. . 13re Ivnn ;a . ..* :*PW

.

'Kn3rnn

vn': 1p '1T L:[Wi]n

I3'3n^vl

:n' Mn::

, *,:: 2

D-,l.

tirn nz3n

mnn pnen []. The (8) .. *

*. . (6) , * *

(7) name of

R. Shebib's colleague, who apparently addressed together with him the question to the Gaon Hai (of Sura), is not preserved. The author of the above responsum was no doubt also a Gaon of Sura who held office subsequently. T.-S. Io G 3 contains twelve leaves of Gaonic Responsa, eight of which apparently emanate from 'Amram Gaon. Fol. 5, recto, ends sni'rw

1IP

pDm.

Fol. 5, verso, begins

:4nri n rnm p:u )a i3 1pmnwrninm (NnxS'w=) '%t5wzn. Thus these questions arrived at the school on Hanukah (1)I70 Sel. = 858 c. E., when the chapters 9pt (Yoma IV) and ylnrn (Yeb. IV) were expounded.8 The first responsum iw D1 DnnWmw after the above superscription begins vWrp 't Xi. 1NK It is the same responsum as tin l. mns n3'n2 no. with the in found 'i", 56, important heading showing Well known is the expression tDn, ;15nI n;11n5D 5w ,nJn1 (Abot 311). Of course there is also an interpretation of A similar heading we have in Geon. II, 326, 1. iI if. the Torah ;,inI. ch. 1NitD"1I 5II'N IX) Ni;3 1' (B. k., "n t DDj n3W' iK'n,Kns 8

After 15) understand I:D.

ni'i1 '1I1 DP'.

/ 'IqD 1 "n

twN Nw. nD nrIDNrNnTDn nID'

1- nnD I

THE JEWISH

446

QUARTERLY REVIEW

that it was addressed to Barcelona. But the text in our manuscript is more correct. Also the next responsum (fol. 6&) lp"1'm mp?3 nan 5I ,an,3n ,ni'e ,rwm

begins

(wherein the

opinion of R. Sadok is quoted), while the one following (fol. 6b) is the same as i"~ no. 57. There follow other responsa not contained in 5",whereas '5"no. 58 is not found in our manuscript which breaks off (fol. 8b) with pr'l 'twrV :1D3 w:

16v iDP0w

z

n4n

I^ znw ';M

3iu

isn

nrz3

iyw.

It is evident that the collector of 5"J left out several responsa contained in this pamphlet. 5";,no. 58, is probably taken from the missing part.9 9 The same pamphlet of responsa is apparently partly reproduced in T.-S. 20. 183, consisting of two vellum leaves, brownish ink, torn and damaged. Fol. i, r., 1. 17, concludes a responsum. We then have the same heading as in i#. no. 56, but without the words n'13. bQ'llM n V? n M4w N:1r6m'1! It reads 1n h:b n NIsU17 ?112)nO K'U1n n 1 bFU n b NPi)4 1K4W M lwl nnnbnl 6=nl 1D D'11N=1 [n=67V 1Y)6 lzsnE = i n ni Nz1 wl ,T^ nlv n nny i nrn3 I9wr)^ KNr i ,- n5 -jis5

DeIs 'pcl] x',w

m lp n1)

nyw D

i5m=n '-

.

j

nniynn ,[n]i5

v>: nvnn.?m

Ym? n=-mij, 3ni. NMD: SmIn ..

;DD mnDI1 1e See p1l myv y 17a

nn 'k n[.v]?i.,npi

n Lw c v5o n:; ? Ipp ok . y5i

See especially my work, 1. c., vol. I, pp. 50 ff.

No

1


i,

r,w "n nmnnngs

v ipj'

D1

l6 rrvIg

SNI nv

455

4LK Tf1

mlnnrDD3nn5N 33Dnn5 rnnLbnt Don 4'TD1y[*];N inr;K n=K iS rsn 1ri nn n^v ntiDnNt 1:y3 K 33D3 1 ir n, ynn^l Y 4= "i /: Ni mTin nrnnm n4 IcNKt itrWi FtiK.-13 1D3K nS tD:N ptwz n^p T-m- nn&o ;n3nwnnin3z tpnl niw,4 - ijn n)iw 4nw smnw ;3 ns1'^^ ws: '*1n :Xin 51:n p n:n lzn=:l Npynr ??

rnil5r ^nn ,nw\

WH1.

The epistle probably emanates from Kairowan. The writer was anxiously awaiting a letter from the 'head of the school' (Hai? But if his correspondent was Ephraim b. Shemarya, then the Palestinian Gaon Solomon b. Yehuda might be meant). On arrival of the letter he met with a certain al-Kathir at Hananel's residence. We read interesting details about collections of money for 'the head of the school' (either Hai or Solomon b. Yehuda of Jerusalem) in Rome. Unfortunately the representative of the school was robbed on board ship which was captured by pirates while making for Bari (the locality jlrD (Serraleone?) I could not identify), and thus the Gaon derived no benefit by the generosity of the Italian Jewry. The writer inquires of his correspondent in Misr (Fustat) concerning certain pamphlets which he sold to Elhanan, no doubt the son of Shemariah. When the letter was written Elhanan was no longer alive. Finally, the writer mentions that two questions were sent to Hai with the request to reply concisely in Arabic. This the Gaon did. Probably the queries came from R. Hananel and his circle. As to the latter's relations with Egypt, it is of interest to cite here a leaf in the T.-S. Collection containing two damaged paper leaves of responsa. Fol. I, recto, concludes a pamphlet of fourteen Gaonic responsa of which nos. i2 (end)-I4 are preserved. No. 13 reads nn: tiS ~:' inir

THE JEWISH

456

QUARTERLY REVIEW

rl I n: ll1 .(Sanh. a 2a) r.V- ini

tunvw j

D^3'Jz1]UD Q4w3 w1'

ni1pn [pw3

nin

inMM ,t

13nn 1- 13I:

KnII yrnr4 pvWv W'1 ryr

NlWw Nnin

-

iw"

wnlnv

ji4ul

r.n

[F142'3 1]zp

[nnr ^ym

;n3 p"nm sNnn=

uj.

This

Gaon is Sherira's grandfather. The Babylonian Geonim usually wrote their responsa in Aramaic. Only when the questions were written in Arabic the reply would be in the same language. See, e.g.,

n", no. 371, where Sherira and Hai write VI On K,n IW&23WK'NNlnn pI5 ,nnmwn :nn5. T.-S. 8 G 62,

mn n contains a pamphlet of Gaonic responsa in Jewish Arabic i~ 1 ni,KW 'K is )NWlK (six leaves). Fol. 3 a begins .'n'lm IDfIUK p

riWlb

n-I4iIn WK- 4n LMUK v

1 Dnl

ClS .:Inm

m:


VN1~11n~

nlnZti 412

463

There

niY3n

follow the questions and responsa in Jewish Arabic. On the other hand, scholarly correspondents of the Geonim endeavoured to write in Aramaic. Thus in ri% no. 325 (from IKabes to Hai, dated ioi6 C. E.), the writers, so to say, apologize for sending the legal question in Arabic because it reached them so from the parties concerned in W n2bp4rT the case (see P. 311I, ijvz wi

1NV1i

rl1-1Ni

v

Bodl. 285 121 (fols. 45-9, imiz mnvr). ~I i 4yz of the Talmud text ; several the for wording portant passages translated into Arabic) concludes (fol. 49 b, l. io if.),

rmn -[nz

i~~nrni-i

m

rullnn

nw-in 1-rinri -i~n:

~3~' This responsum, written in 987 C.E., no P-1 doubt emanat-es from Sherira."l So far no son of Hai is known at all. But Bodl. 2682' i. e. I'of Israel' (cp. Ps. 8o. i6, 71r3fl 11YM M1). For similar endings of responsa pamphlets by Sherira and Hai see In this '1~,nos.36, 7 7 208, .2i9, 264, 314, 328, 3442 369, 1,42 couinexion it is of interest to cite responsa by a certain scholar, Sa'adya b. Yehuda (probably of Egypt), who apologizes for replying in Arabic. He would have wished to write in Hebrew but had to make use of the language in which the questions were drawn up. The responsa are contained in T1.-S.8 G 7 6 consisting of four paper leaves, lar-ge square hand, of the eleventh or twelfth centuries. Fol. i, recto, begins ~IMIln 30 31

THE JEWISH

464

REVIEW

QUARTERLY

contains a treatise by R. Hai (fols. i-2), then (fol. 3 a, in different handwriting) a responsum about the second day of the Festivals ('w 'r^, cp. ", no. I), no doubt also by this Gaon. On fol. 4b, end, there begins another responsum by him, in Arabic, addressed to Elhanan (b. Shemarya, see above, p. 435), ti pnS i6 3un :4 m i M rni1. It was in reply to Elhanan's question about this very problem of The responsum ends on fol. 6 b, followed by n,31~ t'n :. another decision c =3 an^lsY an 3ninN

w3n i

'n'

W 3051iS 51T rt ~n 3mingr

in

n3,n

w a-lm s ww = mN nn3nlm33n rimn Sy,g np lmp 3n3 1P5,n1 .(Prov.27. 19) ii w:6D n-3Qn 4n=3':

rin5nnmnr ,-innpp 'lnsnzi 1innnmwi 3:inmn: (r.;3ixyn) n;1rDsnn %nYin Sn) p (r.lintn) lnM,n 3wSflnS(i.e. hastened) nqKI5rn 3 n3 r 3i: ,n,~n vnlp l~vSw[]]nbtv :3ni5 ,nxil nimrmn n:nn TnSv nlniin ;nm1n,n:y nv: '5 3 13l]n3:. The responsa touch upon several topics.

'viY tE cerptedhere: 1'$5nl5mWnmnln

The following details are ex-

IK MSKK,! i

a 'sb tii8, O*m ps1 nr

r(M (i, verso) DD ni11 ,D ; n uinm

nne n1wJn3

, . . 'D'S~ 1:3 [?K~1] (2, verso) ;... * n nnD n

i53 ;1D a3n >rn 4DnSNDi

n i ?D ^ nmn NjnD mnnltI)imwn)Vy niD:l n3mn ,nn,n nir:nw n N D ID ..ro *Dnn nrtK 'an ., * zn= 1n1iK N3r1 jr3a ov ) NaDSK'N3riin rlsIts nnnil rpn SKPa VscW A new set of responsa begins on fol. 3, recto:

nsWn D1: 3

m~n ,

nmnl:n 13

;na;n

3wniS rF n

'nmi 'nlznl

Fnawn3

ns,'S :, 3nbW ymn:in ,nl

1N nn3n3w

nil33

yp[rln

3nm3 nnns

rs

r, 7

nnm~ wn-pn pjl~i mm2 jllv: -n (r. -nl3Wn) 'n:n mnmnn, ~Nw K Concerning a certain question our scholar writes: K,s

N

n ne3 ,5 3'1 'n'Ss.

nn3=

i1^

n,3ends, 15 ; Fo1.4, verso,

nIS1D1 n

'n~m

WDzn55ne jtN n3lbn r;p:nKimnlinnD n3S,nnYnn;iDs nminw rn nSx nw Drr:WIn 1Q ,il

The Responsa of the Babylonian Geonim as a Source of Jewish History

The Dragons of Autism: Autism As a Source of Wisdom

A History of the English Bible as Literature (2000) (A History of the Bible as Literature)

Lipids as a source of flavor

Perceptions of Jewish history

Jewish Messianism and the History of Philosophy

The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud

A dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic periods

The Babylonian theory of the planets

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

A History of Mediaeval Jewish Philosophy

The Source of Magic

The Source Of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

Babylonian Life and History

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

A History of Medieval Jewish Philosophy

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source Of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Responsa of the Babylonian Geonim as a Source of Jewish History

The Dragons of Autism: Autism As a Source of Wisdom

A History of the English Bible as Literature (2000) (A History of the Bible as Literature)

Lipids as a source of flavor

Perceptions of Jewish history

Jewish Messianism and the History of Philosophy

The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud

A dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic periods

The Babylonian theory of the planets

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

A History of Mediaeval Jewish Philosophy

The Source of Magic

The Source Of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

Babylonian Life and History

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

A History of Medieval Jewish Philosophy

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source Of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

The Source of Magic

Recommend Documents