Geniza Lab

Recto/verso:

Section:

Legal rebuttal regarding the lawsuit between Yosef Lebdi and Wuhsha over the possession of 22 bales of lac. So far, six bifolia and two leaves have been identified, totaling 28 pages of what must have been 40 pages in 2 quires. It seems that the judge in the lawsuit ruled in Lebdi's favor. A certain 'rayyis' wrote and published a critique of the ruling and supported Wuhsha's position. The judge answered with a rebuttal, and what has survived in the Geniza is the rayyis's rebuttal of the judge's rebuttal. The writer often quotes passages from his original critique and from the judge's answer. While the document is complex and obscure, the positions of the two sides are simple. The judge believed Lebdi's agreement with his two partners, Farah and Abu Nasr, includes the 22 loads of lac in question, as long as the other party does not provide proof that it does not include them. The unnamed rayyis argued that since Lebdi had no proof that the 22 bales belonged to his partnership with Farah and Abu Nasr, they must be considered as belonging to Farah's and Abu Nasr's heirs, since the bales are in their possession. In other words, since the bales are in the hands of the heirs, the burden of proof must be on Lebdi. Farah and Abu Nasr, it must be remembered, were murdered in Aydhab. Lebdi was entitled to 29 shares out of 30 of everything in their partnership and Abu Nasr and Farah had between them only one share. Farah's heirs already took their small share of the 22 bales of lac. It is worth noticing that only Wuhsha is mentioned as 'the heir' to Abu Nasr, even though we know she had another brother and two sisters. The trial between Lebdi and Wuhsha took place in 1104, three years after Lebdi came back from India, because the judge intentionally delayed the proceedings to give the parties time to come to an agreement. The last fragment, whose place in the larger document is not known, contains the information that the case was brought before a Muslim judge, who ruled in Wuhsha's favor. This document was thus written during or shortly after 1104. ENA 2855 16: I, 27a p. 1 T-S Ar 47 245: I, 28, p. 1 ENA 2855 15: I, 27a, p. 2 T-S Ar 43 272: I, 27 T-S G2 60: I, 28a, pp. 1-8 T-S Ar 49 33: I, 28b. For further explanation of the complex codicology of this document see Friedman's notes in pp. 174-177 in the Hebrew edition, and pp. 242-244 in the English edition.

Ed. S. D. Goitein, unpublished editions https://princetongenizalab.github.io/goitein-notes/4C.1.7%20India%20Book_%20Final%20Chapter%20I_%201-44%20%28Libdi%29/T-S%20Ar.%2043.272_1%20%28PGPID%205364%29.pdf; also ed. S. D. Goitein, unpublished editions https://princetongenizalab.github.io/goitein-notes/5B.1.2%20India%20Book-%20trade%20docs%20291-end/T-S%20Ar.%2043.272_2%20%28PGPID%205364%29.pdf.