Geniza Lab

Recto/verso: recto and verso

Section:

Letter 1 of 4 of Letters Miscellany, a collection of letters representing both sides of the calendar controversy. Letters 1 and 2 are pro-Babylonian. Both respond to a polemic on the calendar by the Palestinian Head of Academy (or one of his disciples), and both refute systematically each of his polemical argument. Addressee suspected, with his disciples, to be an ally of Palestinian camp. Author claims not to suspect him, but calls on him nevertheless to denounce this rumour publicly, and to join in the campaign against the Palestinians (fol.3r:18-3v:19). The addressee appears to be a Palestinian resident, as the author of our letter claims that the majority of Israel are on the Babylonian side, whereas ben Meir’s followers are localised and only ‘in a few places that are around you’ (fol.3v:7-8). Author writes from a position of authority, and appears to know recipient personally. Polemic responding to a text that was written by ben Meir or his disciple. One line (fol.3v:6-7) suggests that our letter may have been written between Passover and the New Year of 922 CE. T-S 10J32.1 is almost completely preserved in a single piece, and contains uniquely the entire text of the folio, although its bottom margin is torn off and lost; its measurements are thus informative, even if the folio’s full dimensions (its bottom margin, and its total height) remain unknown.

Ed. and trans. Sacha Stern, "The Jewish Calendar Controversy of 921/2 CE," in The Book of the Calendar Controversy: Diplomatic Editions, 1st ed. (2019).

Recto/verso:

Section:

Two fragments edited by Israel Lévi (1900b), which may be considered lost. Re-edited by Bornstein (1904) 87-9. Lévi only reports having found them at the great Exposition in Paris, in the hands of a merchant from Cairo. His collection was initially deposited in the Consistoire Israélite de Paris, and then transferred, in 1945, to the library of the Alliance Israélite Universelle (AIU). Upon further searching, not found in AIU. The text of one of Lévi’s fragments was convincingly joined by Mann (1934: 273-7) to Bodl. Heb. d. 74.27 (for which he relied on Guillaume’s edition).

Recto/verso: recto and verso

Section:

Letter 2, of which only one folio is preserved, is a pro-Babylonian response to a Palestinian polemic on the calendar of 921/2 and on the Four Gates. The folio begins with the end of the refutation of the Palestinians’ second argument. The Palestinians were arguing against the Four Gates, with a rather spurious claim that the Four Gates are incomplete because they only account for four days of the week (the days on which the New Year is allowed to fall). This letter responds that in the Four Gates, every period of time ends where the next one begins, so that the full week is covered from end to end; moreover, some days of the week are mentioned more than once in the Four Gates (fol.4r:1-5). The third argument concerns the rule of 641-642 parts. Our author misinterprets the rule as applying equally to Nisan and to Tishri, which enables him to refute it easily (fol.4r:5-14). After this begins a misplaced text, which belongs before the beginning of this folio. Here the author finishes his refutation of the first argument, and refers to the distortion to the Four Gates through the addition of 641 parts to all the limits (fol.4r:14-16). After begins the second argument (fol.4r:16 – 4v:19). After the end of the misplaced text, the text resumes with the third argument (fol.4v:19-21).