20.04.2013 Views

IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The Assarraf collection provides a good starting point for understanding why Jews<br />

decided to bring their intra-Jewish cases to ‘udūl. 8 As mentioned earlier, approximately 2% of<br />

the documents in the Assarraf collection concern intra-Jewish notarial contracts. The majority of<br />

these (about two-thirds) are powers of attorney in which one Jew grants another Jew agency to<br />

represent him in all legal matters. 9 Often such powers of attorney were drawn up among family<br />

members; for instance, on June 21, 1874, Ya‘aqov made his father Shalom his agent. 10 Others<br />

were among friends or business associates, such as when Maymon b. Sūsān made Shalom his<br />

agent. 11 It is no surprise that Jews drew up such powers of attorney with ‘udūl; if a Jew wanted<br />

to represent another Jew in a sharī‘a court, only an Islamic legal document would constitute<br />

proof that he had power of attorney to do so. 12 In this case, the services of Jewish and Islamic<br />

courts were not competing, since Jews could not use sofrim to draw up intra-Jewish powers of<br />

attorney if they wanted a qāḍī to consider these documents valid.<br />

Most types of contracts did, however, engender direct competition between sofrim and<br />

‘udūl since both types of notaries provided equivalent services. Even in these cases, Jews<br />

sometimes chose notarization in a sharī‘a court. This was especially true for real estate<br />

transactions, particularly sales of property. Real estate transactions constituted about 20% of the<br />

intra-Jewish documents in the Assarraf collection. 13 Among the other collections I consulted,<br />

real estate transactions made up over two-thirds of the intra-Jewish contracts notarized by<br />

8<br />

Since the other intra-Jewish contracts notarized by ‘udūl which I found are not part of larger collections from one<br />

family, they cannot inform us about how individuals or families chose this kind of jurisdictional boundary crossing<br />

as a general rule.<br />

9<br />

That is, 26 out of a total of 39.<br />

10<br />

TC, File #5, 6 Jumādā I 1291.<br />

11<br />

TC, File #4, 21 Dhū al-Qa‘da 1291.<br />

12<br />

For an intra-Jewish power of attorney outside of the Assarraf collection, see PD, 29 Dhū al-Qa‘da 1305, power of<br />

attorney from Avraham b. al-Shaykh Ya‘aqov and his son Moshe.<br />

13<br />

That is, 8 out of 39.<br />

122

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!