Geniza Lab

Letter/petition from an official to the Nagid Mevorakh. In Judaeo-Arabic. Dating: No earlier than 1099 CE, per Cohen, and no later than 1111 CE, based on Mevorakh's dates. Same sender, same addressee, and same subject as T-S 18J4.12. It is about the "desolation" (kharāb) of the Babylonian/Iraqi synagogue. There are two chief complaints. (1) "Members of the (larger) Palestinian synagogue had enticed many of those belonging to the Iraqi one to join their house of worship They held out lures, such as a promise that children would be able to participate more often by being called up to the Torah, since the Scriptural readings in the Palestinian rite were short (and, hence, required less preparation)." (2) "The second reason for the desolate state of the synagogue was the despotic behavior of the beadle (khādim), named al-rayyis Abū l-Ḥasan b. Ghazāl. This Abū l-Ḥasan had been lording it over the congregation, acting more like a rayyis than a beadle, giving orders, taking charge of litigations, and even forcing Mevorakh's own muqaddam (he is called muqaddam in one letter and nāʾib in the other) to cower in his presence. When requested to discharge his synagogue duties, he would brazenly retort: "even if the rayyis (Mevorakh) so commanded me, I would respond, Ί neither listen nor obey'" (lā samʿ wa-lā ṭāʿa). Living with the beadle on the synagogue premises were about fifteen of his relatives, who regarded him as the local boss (shaykh al-mawḍiʿ wa-ṣāḥib amr wa-nahy)." In the AIU letter, the sender describes what may be a further deterioration: "Only a few people... remain in the Babylonian congregation, and they are mainly indigents," as this sender witnessed for himself when he attended services on the previous Shabbat together with Ḥalfon b. Menashshe (called here Abū Saʿīd b. Abū Sahl Ibn al-Qaṭāʾif). Several additional communal officials from this period are mentioned in the letter. (Information mainly from Cohen, Self-Government, pp.254–56, and in part from Goitein’s index card.) Ed. Β. Chapira, Mélanges Hartwig Derenbourg (Paris, 1909), pp.121–30. Transcription awaiting digitization on PGP. Written on a "long daftar"–style bifolio, which is unusual for a letter, but not for drafts.

Letter in the hand of Yosef b. Shemuel b. Seʿadya (court scribe, active ca. 1181–1209). He is describing a marital dispute: "...four sessions... in the last session, and that they... with them, and when that was said to me, I sent... with what was said to me, and I chastised him and restrained him in that, and he said... to him the duty that she should move from this place to another.... Some time later, he came to me screaming for help, saying, 'Divorce me from this woman lest I kill her and lose my life on her account,' and I said to him, 'What is the meaning of this?' ... the falsest thing that could be said about her, until I saw with my own eyes, and... divorced..."

Letter from Avraham b. David Ibn Sughmār (according to Gil), in Fustat, to the Nagid Yaʿaqov b. ʿAmram, in Qayrawān. Dating: Probably spring or summer of 1039 CE, and in any case 1038–42 CE, during the period of conflict between Natan b. Avraham and Shelomo b. Yehuda over the gaʾonate in Palestine. The letter drafts on both recto and verso are about the conflict and the loyalties of the community of Qayrawān. The sender asks the Nagid, who had previously petitioned the Muslim official Abū l-Qāsim Ibn al-Ukhuwwa on Natan’s behalf, to show his renewed support for the legitimate gaʾon, Shelomo b. Yehuda. This letter also mentions the arrival in Fusṭāṭ of the Nasi Daniel b. ʿAzarya and presents him as a great reformer, banning the ownership of female slaves, excommunicating miscreants, and cracking down on music. As an afterthought, the sender alludes to terrible wrongs being inflicted by Natan b. Avraham's relatives. One remarkable thing about this letter is that it was written at least a decade before Daniel b. ʿAzarya served as gaʾon (beginning in 1051 CE after the death of Shelomo b. Yehuda). It's also one of the key sources for Daniel b. ʿAzarya's lineage: it says that his father was the exilarch ʿAzarya b. Shelomo b. Zakkay, whose elder son Zakkay (Daniel's brother) established the dynasty of Nasis in Mosul whose descendants crop up throughout the Geniza documents of the next two centuries. Jacob Mann published T-S 18J4.16, and Mark Cohen discovered the join with ENA 3765.10 and the significance of this pair of letters. (Information from Goitein, Cohen, Gil, and CUDL.)

Letter from a man, in Damascus, to his father, perhaps in Fustat. The sender expresses his longing and desperation in this foreign land, especially after the departure of Manṣūr ("the world closed itself in on me... I cry... and wish my soul would leave, but it does not"). He reports that he is revered, because he has successfully humiliated all the competing cantors, and now nobody dares to chant in his presence. (The father seems to be a cantor as well.) His father was upset that he entered the service of "someone like the ghulām"; Manṣūr will explain everything when he arrives. He was unable to send some of the goods for his brother; Ibn Abū l-Zakkār may have told him not to trust a potential bearer. He has sent with Manṣūr a mould of cheese worth 2.5 dirhams, and he has equipped Manṣūr with funds to keep the cheese well-oiled en route lest it dry out. He complains about the lack of sustenance in Damascus. He claims to fast most days out of sorrow/longing, and he repeatedly asks for prayers. He is worried that his enemies will gain the upper hand over him (he may have seen this in a dream? Verso, line 8). He describes the hospitality of his paternal uncles and their children and his maternal aunt. He asks for news of potential fiancees back home—his cousin (bint ʿamm) and Nabaʾ—since the locals in Damascus are trying to set him up with a local woman. He emphasizes that he would never get married with his father absent. He alludes to a period of a year when he had a falling-out with his father, a rift which is now healed (this may explain some of the over-the-top language of longing in this letter). He asks for some aqwāl, which should be sent to the house of the Nezer along with instructions to forward them to Aleppo should the son have traveled already. He concludes by warning his father to seal all of his future letters—"and not with a heavy seal." (Information in part from CUDL.) ASE

Letter from Yeḥiel b. Yiṣḥaq ha-Ṣarfati, in Jerusalem, to a certain Menaḥem (probably the judge Menaḥem b. Yiṣḥaq b. Sasson), probably in Cairo. Dating: Early 13th century, likely 1219–29 CE (Shweka's assessment). See also T-S 8J33.4, a previous letter on the same matter. "At the beginning of the 13th century there were two communities in Jerusalem which were established after the city was conquered by Salah al-Din in 1191: the Ashkelonite community and the Maghrebi community. Beginning in 1210, a wave of pilgrims – known as the Emigration of the Rabbis – arrived from France and England. Relations between the various communities were very tense, as testified by Yehuda Alharizi, who visited Jerusalem in 1214. From letters of R. Yehiel the Frenchman to Fustat, we learn about a heated debate that took place in Jerusalem at the time. Because the Jews were not allowed to immerse themselves in the Shiloah spring, a campaign was held in Egypt to build a new mikveh, and a large sum was collected and sent to the community in Jerusalem for this purpose. But R. Yehiel, the leader of the community, objected to the construction of a new mikveh, preferring that the women of the community immerse in a private mikveh in his home – according to him, this would enable his wife to supervise the women’s immersion. R. Yehiel appealed to the local judge in Fustat, asking permission to change the the donation’s destination. However, members of the local community were not satisfied with this arrangement, and tried to build a new mikveh. The ensuing dispute split the community, until R. Yehiel and his group were forced to leave the synagogue. The two groups did not hesitate to involve the Muslim ruler in the conflict, which led to the arrest of some members of the community. The controversy spilled over into an interethnic struggle, with tensions caused by changes based on the French halachic tradition instituted by R. Yehiel. Until now, we knew of this story from two pages published almost a century ago. With the discovery of five additional pages, we now have a full description of this episode from the history of Jerusalem in the early 13th century." (Information from Roni Shweka.) Previous description: Four-page letter in Hebrew perhaps from Alexandria, concerning a dispute between prominent members of the Jewish community and the consequent expulsion of one of them from the synagogue. (Information from Mediterranean Society, IV, 384, and Goitein's index cards.)

Legal document. Court records made by Abū l-Khayr and Peraḥya about a physical argument between the leader Abū l-Bahā and Abū l-Wafā in front of the Babylonian synagogue in Fusṭāṭ, during which Abū l-Wafā beat Abū l-Bahā repeatedly, tearing his clothes and uncovering his head. Attested by the notary Efrayim b. Meshullam (12th century). (Information from CUDL)

Legal testimony. In the hand of Avraham b. Natan Av. No witness signatures. Location: Cairo. Dated: Thursday, 27 Adar I 1415 Seleucid, which is 1104 CE. The document contains the proceedings before the court regarding the matter of dispute between two members of the community of Malīj, Shelomo b. Avraham (aka Salāma b. Ibrāhīm al-Sayrajī) and Peraḥya ha-Kohen b. Ṭarfon (aka Abū l-Surūr b. Ṭarīf). The story opens with a verbatim copy of another testimony (called a sheṭar/maḥḍar) dated 2.5 months earlier (Saturday night 12 Ṭevet 1415 Seleucid), in which the witnesses Mevorakh b. Yiṣḥaq, Yosef b. Mevorakh, and Elʿazar b. Yosef testify that they entered the house of a Jew named Bashshār and found Salāma b. Ibrāhīm assailing Abū l-Surūr b. Ṭarīf and hanging on to his clothing; the latter was not defending himself. Salāma insisted on taking Abū l-Surūr before the government (sulṭan); Abū l-Surūr insisted on taking Salāma to the Jewish courts (before 'the Rayyis'). Salāma then insulted the Rayyis and said, "I am [King] Baldwin (Bardawīl), and Abū l-Surūr is my prisoner!" Salāma summoned the police (rajjāla) and had Abū l-Surūr and Yūsuf b. Rajā and Yūsuf b. Manṣūr taken before the Muslim courts/government (headed by "the amir"). The amir nearly had the defendants beaten. (End of first document.) Now, Abū l-Surūr has finally succeeded in bringing Salāma before the Jewish court and "sayyidnā" (though the pronouns are not entirely clear in l. 4 and it could also be Salāma suing Abū l-Surūr). The court orders Salāma to justify his behavior. Salāma says to summon the witnesses. The court refuses, saying, And what if they don't obey the order? Abū l-Surūr says that the court should use the ḥerem stam (blanket excommunication) to coerce people into reporting any communication they received from Salāma to antagonize Abū l-Surūr before the Muslim courts. Either Salāma or Abū l-Surūr at this point accuses the other of bearing false witness in the Jewish court ("before Sayyidnā"). The court reads out a letter that Salāma confesses to be his own, in which he accuses a troublemaker (=Abū l-Surūr) who had been exiled from Malīj to Cairo of sending letters to Ibn al-Qāsh the dyer and to the shoṭer and the nadiv to the effect that they aren't rid of him yet, since he will return as soon as Rabbenu dies. The court asks Salāma on what basis he made that claim, and Salāma can only respond that someone (he refuses to say who) told him about Abū l-Surūr's alleged letters. The court believes Abū l-Surūr's side of the story, but also issues a ḥerem stam commanding anyone who did receive a troublemaking letter from Abū l-Surūr to come forward with it. The shoṭer and the nadiv are present, and they deny receiving any such letter from Abū l-Surūr. The document ends abruptly with the line, "The day broke, and the crowd dispersed." ASE

Letter from Mordechai b. Simḥa who is in the Persian city of Kashan. In Hebrew. Dating: Possibly 17th century. The sender also signs his name Mordechai Ṣefati ha-Kohen. "I beseech the master to speak with the parnasim of the congregations to give me what they see fit, sufficient for the expenses of travel, for God willing, I plan to go to the land of Israel. Let them do for me at least what they did for the Indian gentile, the idol worshipper." (They provided him with a donkey and gave him money.) "Let them do for me what they did for the chelebi - many 'גרושו - even though he was going outside of the land, to Persia (ereṣ ha-ʿajam), in order to eat meat and drink wine..." On verso he adds a postscript about what happened with the parnas Yeḥezqel (some sort of conflict, with insults flying). Edited by Simha Assaf. (Information in part from CUDL.)

Letter in Judaeo-Arabic. Fragment (lower right corner). Relates a story about a conflict involving Ibrāhīm, al-Rayyis al-Jalīl, two policemen (? rājilān), and humiliation — perhaps because a Jew (Ibrāhīm?) dared to oppose a Muslim (al-Rayyis al-Jalīl?). In any event, the addressee is to convey thanks to Abū l-Munā for how he resolved the situation.

Letter in Judaeo-Arabic. Fragment (horizontal piece from the middle). Dating: Possibly 12th century based on hand, but that is a guess. The sender reports on some conflict probably involving public prayers. "...[they said] they would tell the judge and the teacher, but they didn't... the 9th of Av... pray, and I was shocked, because I had already reconciled with them—since for a long time I have prayed [...] and there was a great dispute between us, and we agreed that I would [...] but they I could not do the mufāsara(?)... the door until he prayed, and then..." On verso (labeled recto on CUDL), he writes at length about his sorrow at being parted from Rabbenu, and how Rabbenu said he would honor him with a letter, but he has received no letter from him since Purim. He asks for a letter from the addressee. He mentions his dead father (ואלדי נע). Regards to Abū Saʿd. The text in the margin mentions Rabbenu again and the judge Yosef. (Information in part from CUDL)

Letter from an ardent supporter to Daniel b. ʿAzarya. In Judaeo-Arabic. Dating: Ca. 1055 CE (per Goitein). This is only the first leaf of the letter. The sender puts his money and his friends at Daniel's disposal. The entire letter is also an attack on ʿEli b. ʿAmram, who is never directly named. The sender describes communal strife in Fustat after the death of the gaon Shelomo b. Yehuda (d. 1051) and Abū Kathīr Efrayim b. Shemarya (d. after 1053 CE, probably ca. 1055 CE). The other supporters of Daniel b. ʿAzarya wanted to appoint the Rav (=Yehuda b. Yosef) as the successor of Efrayim b. Shemarya, and they did not want ʿEli b. ʿAmram to assume the position. (The Rav was in the camp of Daniel b. ʿAzarya despite being the cousin of his rivals Yosef and Eliyya, the sons of Shelomo ha-Kohen b. Yehosef who was briefly gaon in 1025 CE.) However, the sender paradoxically thinks that their enemy ʿEli b. ʿAmram should succeed Efrayim, precisely because then he will have to pay obeisance to Daniel, and the two camps will be united. The letter's contents are as follows: (1) Condolences for the death of Daniel's sister (r1–12); (2) Praises and seeking forgiveness for the fight that they had in the house of al-Damsīsī—Goitein understands that this is because the sender had advocated for ʿEli b. ʿAmram, Daniel's enemy (r13–21); (3) ʿEli ("the idiot") didn't understand that the sender has long been a supporter of Daniel b. ʿAzarya, even before the death of Shelomo b. Yehuda; and anything the sender has done for ʿEli is like what David did for Saul—serving him despite the latter's intention to kill him (r23–36); an explanation of how the sender supported ʿEli b. ʿAmram over the Rav, against the objections of the rest of Daniel's contingent, including Abū Isḥāq (Avraham b. Yiṣḥaq Ibn al-Furāt) (v1–12); ʿEli b. ʿAmram's boorish behavior once he assumed leadership, which alienated the other leading figures of the community (including Abū Sahl al-Kohen, a certain Abū l-Surūr, and a certain Elḥanan) to the point that they boycotted the synagogue (v12–28); ʿEli, fearing that he would be deposed in favor of the Rav, recruited his son-in-law Ḥunayn and started spreading malicious rumors about the Rav, including something he supposedly said to Ibn al-Talmid involving the latter's mother. Then, "Ḥunayn went and gathered some potters and quarrelsome people, and hired about fifty of them, and they wrote legal deeds about the Rav, [saying] that he had apostatized (pashaʿa) in al-Shām and [later] arrived in Egypt to re-Judaize (yatahawwada)" (v29–36). (Information from Goitein's edition. Translation of the last section from Moshe Yagur, "Several Documents from the Cairo Geniza Concerning Conversion to Islam," (2020).)

Ownership inscription of a book that belonged to Mevasser b. Yeshuʿa ha-Levi. The book was then purchased by Nadiv b. Saʿadya ha-Levi in 1469 of the Seleucid Era (= 1157 CE) and later inherited by Shelomo b. Shemuel ha-Levi. In the top part of recto, there are Judaeo-Arabic notes in which an unidentified person recorded all the items of titillating gossip that (s)he and his or her brother "Ab" heard mainly from Abū l-Khayr. (1) Abū Manṣūr used to think that your father was מכשוף אלדאר אלכומר, the meaning of which is not entirely clear. (2) The "family" of al-Raḥbī does not observe the laws of purity (טומאה וטהרה) and sits in front of him exposed in a diaphanous gown (ghilāla), and al-Raḥbī drinks on the Sabbath. (3) Ibn al-Baṭṭāl sits with al-Raḥbī and curses you with "the Z and the Q" (from "zawj qaḥba," the worst curse possible; see Ibn Taymiyya, Minhāj al-Sunna, https://lib.eshia.ir/11366/1/458) and al-Raḥbī joins in the cursing even as he pretends to be among those who love you, but "promise not to tell that I told you." (4) [Some days later in Suwayqat al-Shamʿ or al-Jāmiʿ]: Al-Raḥbī said that someone was his "son" in Alexandria; the rest of this tidbit is cryptic and mentions a certain Kohen; (5) ʿUqayb said that al-Raḥbī told him that Ibn al-Baradānī fornicated (fasaqa) with the juwayra (presumably a diminutive form of jāriya, female slave, perhaps implying that she was also a minor) whom he redeemed from captivity, "and he is even more wicked than that" or "could there be someone more wicked than that?" (פיכון רשע ארשע מן האדא). (6) ʿUqayb said something about running into Ibn al-Baṭṭāl. (7) He said that Abū ʿImrān cursed me with a curse that would be too long to tell. (8) Among the various things he said about Abū Isḥāq and his brother-in-law. . . . [this one is tricky to figure out, and involves a drunk Ibn Kulayb and a house known by the name of Samāʾ al-Mulk]. (Information in part from GRU catalogue via FGP.) ASE

Legal fragment. In the hand of Ḥalfon b. Menashshe. Involving conflict (shurūr wa-taʿab), two women who have been killed, a settlement of the conflict, and someone named Abū Saʿīd. This is a duplicate copy of T-S 8.111 (PGPID 3652).

Letter from a man, probably in Damietta, to his mother, in Fustat. In Judaeo-Arabic, with the address in Arabic script. To be sent to the Muṣāṣa neighborhood, to the shop of [...] al-[...] al-Yahūdī. Dating: Probably 12th or 13th century. The sender reports that he has opened a shop with "the physician" (al-ḥakīm), where they will work together for a period of 1 year, from Sukkot to Sukkot. There seems to be a dispute between the physician and an in-law of the sender (יקום יצארב הו ויה ויקול לה איש לך פי דא). The sender makes inquiries about a fancy robe (khilʿa) and big turban (biqyār) and asks his mother to go to the judge (al-Dayyān) and have him send a letter to the physician in Damietta, to be read to the heads of the community. There is also some issue involving a silk girdle (zunnār ḥarīr) and an oath. Regards to the mother's entire family. ASE

Letter in Judaeo-Arabic. Narrow, with wide space between the lines. Urging a distinguished addressee to resolve a communal conflict, so that he may earn reward from God and the prayers and respect of the congregation.

Recto: Qaraite legal document. In Hebrew. Dated: Monday, 25 Av 5335 AM, which is 1575 CE. The context is a communal struggle over who would assume the position of the late Yaʿaqov, who served as chief cantor (ḥazzan kabir) and beadle (? משרת) in the Dār Simḥa synagogue (כנסת בית שמחה). The judges Aharon and Yosef al-Tawrīzī appointed Yehuda al-Tawrīzī ha-Rofe, because of his beautiful voice and wisdom. He will serve for 3 years without a salary (jāmakiyya). He will officiate at all celebrations and behave humbly with the congregation, his friends and enemies alike. Verso: A draft version of the same document, giving more details about the circumstances. This side clarifies that he will donate his salary to the widow and children of the late Yaʿāqov. Merits further examination.