Geniza Lab

Testimony in which a wife, a widow with three sons, releases her husband from from all obligations other than paying the delayed marriage gift and dowry and letting her live in his house for five years after his death as promised, and declares that her three sons would have no claims whatsoever against him and that her husband would not sue her sons, in Sanbutya/Sunbat, Adar 1427/February 1116.

Agreement concerning Levirate Marriage between the widow of Shelomo Ben Yosef Hanagid and Yeshu'a Ben Hanagid Yosef, Cairo, 1482.

Court record concerning a widow who has received back her dowry but is still owed her marriage gift, in Bilbays, Elul 1515/August 1204 (Elul 12th does not match Tuesday as the of the week). On verso liturgical poems.

Letter in Judeo-Arabic to Sitt al-Nas bint Moses b. Josiah from a female cousin (both are also in-laws), the daughter of Joseph b. Josiah, asking her to live with her after the death of her husband. On verso is an Arabic love poem (in a different hand). (Information from CUDL and Cecilia Palombo)

Levirate case in which a widow appoints an attorney to sue her brother-in-law with the demand either to marry or to free her. Dated: 20 Sivan 164. The dating clause is written clearly, but there's a key to interpreting it. Ashtor interpreted it incorrectly as (5)164 (AM) = 1404 (History of the Jews in Egypt and Syria under the Mamluks, vol. 3, p. 100 n. 2). Goitein corrected Ashtor's reading to 1204 because, as with many other 13th c documents in the geniza, you have to add 4800 to the stated date, so 4964 AM = 1204. To write 4964 in Hebrew, you would have to use a lot of characters, since the alef-bet only covers up until 400. So 4964 would be דתתקסד (that is, 4(000) + 400 + 400 + 100 + 60 + 4). But since in 1204, everyone knew the 4000 + 400 + 400 part, they just omitted it and wrote 164. So the document dates to 1204.

Fragment of a settlement with a widow. Dated: Nisan 1456 Seleucid, which is 1145 CE, under the authority of Shemuel b. Ḥananya. In the hand of Natan b. Shemuel. The widow acknowledges that she had already received the immediate installments from the marriage gift, as well as copper and other items. The total still due to her was one third, and she has now received it. Her brother releases the heirs in her name from any future claims. Witnesses: Natan b. Shelomo ha-Kohen; Natan b. Shemuel ha-Ḥaver. (Information from Mediterranean Society, III, 387.) Join: Oded Zinger.

Letter from a widow, with one orphaned daughter and whose house had collapsed, petitioning a high-ranking official in the community for assistance. The woman employs the common strategy of appealing especially for her fatherless daughter, and indicates furthermore that she herself was an orphan. (Mark Cohen, Voices of the Poor, 89) EMS

Legal query addressed to Maimonides, whose autograph responsum is written underneath the query. The question regards an elderly widow who accused a teacher of asking her to sleep with him. The writer insists that she is merely trying to destroy the reputation of a man who would never do such a thing, and he asks how the man should proclaim his innocence. Maimonides responds that her claim should not be believed without witnesses, that anyone who has been slandered can excommunicate his slanderer by name, but may not obtain a blanket excommunication against all who accuse him. However, still better in this case is to put an end to the gossip and avoid any kind of public discussion or excommunication. The handwriting of the questioner closely resembles that of Moshe b. Levi ha-Levi (see also ENA 2808.16 in which Moshe b. Levi asks the recipient to obtain an answer to a fatwa that he had previously sent to Fustat). ASE. Ed. Joshua Blau, R. Moses b. Maimon: Responsa, (Hebrew; 3 vols; Jerusalem, 1957–1986): Vol. 2, pp. 522-3, #274.

Legal query in the hand of Moshe b. Levi ha-Levi regarding a man who married a widow, then found in her a "hidden defect" from which he contracted an illness. He is a poor man without even enough money for food and has no source of livelihood except public charity. He is in bad straits because whenever he demands a divorce, she insists on receiving her ketubba payment in full. Does the law permit him to pay it in installments? He insists that he is unable to pay one lump sum because of his illness and poverty. On verso there is a fragment of a page of piyyutim in the hand of Moshe b. Levi ha-Levi. ASE.

Legal fragment in the hand of Ḥalfon b. Menashshe. The wife of the speaker had given a share in a house to the widow of Abū ʿAlī Ḥasan al-Amadī (אלאמדי), stating that the ground rent (ḥikr) was to be paid by [...]. Now the speaker asserts that the conditions about the ḥikr referred to a large house which he inherited from his wife after her death. The deed of gift was dated Adar 1428 Seleucid, which is March 1117 CE, so this document dates to some time later. (Information from Goitein's index cards)

Notes for drawing up a marriage document. Groom: Yehuda b. Eliyya ha-Levi. Bride: Bat Ṣabāḥ, a widow. The marriage payments are listed, and then "half a house in al-Qālūs." (Information in part from CUDL.)

Letter in Judaeo-Arabic. Dating: Probably 11th or 12th century. Small fragment, with hardly any text left. It states that the husband of a woman related to Ibn al-Fulādhī (apparently a profession having to do with steel, fulādh or fūlādh) died, and she became pregnant. It then mentions "in the fortified city of ʿA[sqalān]." AA. ASE.

Upper part of a will in a hand that resembles that of ʿImmanuʾel b. Yeḥiʾel (active ca. 1231–65), in which the husband of Sutayt bt. Nadiv clarifies that half of the house in which he lives belongs to his wife, as well as the jewelry that has been given as collateral to Yosef Ibn Nufayʿ in Fustat against a loan of 150 nuqra dirhams; "it must be ransomed with the money of the orphans." Lastly, the female slave named Nasrīn [belongs to Sutayt]. (Information from Goitein's index card and from Med Soc III, p. 255 n. 35.)

Legal query (in a different hand than recto) concerning the case of a widow holding a statement of trustworthiness, who had declared that she possessed none of her husband's possessions. She refused to let the elders into her house as she had been advised, but later opened the door after all. However, the inventory was not taken away. (Information from Mediterranean Society, III, p. 255, and from Goitein's index cards.) NB: This used to be called T-S 10J21.16 on PGP.