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

legal proof of his claim. 91 It is likely that most cases were expected to be settled with legal
proof, and that specifically mentioning this requirement amounted to re-stating a common
practice. 92 This is further evidence of the degree to which sharī‘a courts were central to Jews’
lives even beyond the walls of the sharī‘a courthouse.
Even if a petitioner’s claim was unquestionably valid, it was not always simple for the
Makhzan official to extract the money necessary to settle a case. One of the most common
methods employed was to imprison the debtors, thieves, or murderers until they paid. 93
Imprisonment was not typically seen as a punishment, but rather as a way to force recalcitrant
91
For cases in which the sultan ordered that legal proof be produced, see, e.g.: BH, K 171, p. 13, 25 Rajab 1307;
BH, K 181, p. 83, 25 Jumādā I 1309; p. 322, 18 Jumādā II 1310; p. 365, 19 Ramaḍān 1310. See also DAR, Fez,
6007, Muḥammad b. al-Ṣarabī b. al-Maḥbār to ‘Abd al-Wāḥid al-Mas‘adī, 20 Rabī‘ II 1301; DAR, Yahūd, ‘Abd al-
Hafīẓ to al-Madanī al-Ajlāwī, 17 Shawwāl 1324. For cases in which the local Makhzan oficial requested legal
proof, see: BH, K 181, p. 158, 21 Ramaḍān 1309; p. 119, 21 Rajab 1309; p. 154, 16 Ramaḍān 1309; p. 157, 21
Ramaḍān 1309; p. 265, 29 Ṣafar 1310; p. 336, 17 Rajab 1310; p. 343, 2 Sha‘bān 1310; p. 347, 11 Sha‘bān 1310.
Makhzan officials also requested legal proof when they did not believe that the claim was justified: BH, K 181, p.
274, 24 Rabī‘ I 1310 and p. 340, 24 Rajab 1310. For cases in which the debtors requested that the creditor produce
legal proof of his claim, see: BH, K 171, p. 76, 30 Ramaḍān 1307; BH, K 174, p. 53, 3 Jumādā II 1308; p. 112, 3
Shawwāl 1308.
92
See DAR, Yahūd, ‘Abdallāh al-Bayḍāwī to al-Tūrīs, 6 Sha‘bān 1308, in which al-Bayḍāwī simply reported that he
had inspected the legal proofs of the Jewish creditor and that they were in order, suggesting that this was the
standard practice.
93
I found a total of thirty-eight entries which mention that one or more debtors of Jewish creditors were imprisoned
for their debts (approximately 11% of the total number of cases). See also DAR, Fez, Mawlāy Ḥasan to Sa‘īd b.
Farajī, 6 Jumādā I 1301; 2216, ‘Abdallāh b. Aḥmad to Mawlāy Ḥasan, 6 Ṣafar 1303. In one case, a Jew and a
Muslim were both imprisoned—though it is not entirely clear why. The Jew entrusted some livestock to the
Muslim; presumably the disagreement arose when the Muslim did not return the livestock or share the revenue with
the Jew (DAR, Marrakesh, Muḥammad b. ‘Azūz to Aḥmad b. al-Ṭāhir, 11 Rabī‘ II 1282). For a colorful (if biased)
description of the imprisonment of debtors, see Maeterlinck, “Les institutions juridiques au Maroc,” 478. There is
very little written about the history of prisons in Morocco: see Aḥmad Miftāḥ al-Baqālī, Mu’assasat al-sujūn fī al-
Maghrib (Rabat: Maṭābi‘ mīthāq, 1979), 75-81, although al-Baqālī’s work is overly idealized and more of an
apology than a reliable history. Another method which Makhzan officials used to make sure debtors paid was
simply to confiscate their goods and hand them over as payment or sell them and give the proceeds to the creditor:
see BH, K 181, p. 127, 3 Sha‘bān 1309; p. 213, 29 Dhū al-Qa‘da 1309; p. 233, 7 Muḥarram 1310; p. 252, 4 Ṣafar
1310; p. 346, 10 Sha‘bān 1310. See also DAR, Fez, [Mawlāy] Ismā‘īl to Mawlāy Ḥasan, 23 Jumādā I 1303. In this
case a Makhzan official arrested the debtors who came into the city (presumably Fez) and confiscated their goods in
order to pay their debts. At the time of writing he still had the goods in his possession. It is interesting to note that
the Jewish creditor requested that the amounts confiscated be recorded on the bills of debt. For murder cases, see:
BH, K 157, p. 37, 29 Ramaḍān 1306; BH, K 171, p. 78, 30 Ramaḍān 1307; BH, K 181, p. 69, 6 Jumādā I 1309; p.
107, 4 Rajab 1309; p. 127, 4 Sha‘bān 1309; p. 176, 13 Shawwāl 1309; p. 212, 29 Dhū al-Qa‘da 1309; p. 275, 27
Rabī‘ I 1310; p. 314, 28 Jumādā I 1310; p. 345, 5 Sha‘bān 1310; p. 345, 6 Sha‘bān 1310. See also DAR, Fez,
Mawlāy Ḥasan to Sa‘īd b. Farajī, 5 Rabī‘ II 1298. In this case Farajī specified that the suspects in the murder of a
Jew had secured guarantors for their presence in court so he released them from prison. On guarantors, see Chapter
Two. For theft cases, see BH, K 157, p. 74-75, 25 Dhū al-Ḥijja 1306; BH, K 181, p. 58, 21 Rabī‘ II 1309. See also
DAR, Fez, Mawlāy Ḥasan to Sa‘īd b. Farajī, 15 Dhū al-Qa‘da 1294.
205