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

eminding him of his duties regarding the Jewish courts. 111 In particular, the sultan commanded
al-Jīlālī to assist the Jewish judges in settling intra-Jewish lawsuits, to help enforce the Jewish
judges’ rulings, and to refrain from interfering in the Jewish legal system except in order to
upholding the authority of the Jewish judges. 112 Mawlāy Ḥasan’s command to ensure that
Meknes’ Jewish judges could implement their rulings speaks directly to the question of
enforcement, which was a constant challenge for Jewish legal systems in Islamic lands. It was
the Makhzan’s responsibility not only to leave Jewish judges alone to run their own legal affairs,
but also to play an active role in ensuring that Jews adhered to the rulings of their dayyanim. In
this sense, Jewish judges were treated as part of the overall Moroccan legal system. Makhzan
officials were responsible for enforcing the decisions of qāḍīs, who themselves did not possess
the authority to imprison, beat, or otherwise force people to comply with their rulings. Mawlāy
Ḥasan’s letter suggests that he also held local Makhzan officials accountable for the enforcement
of the decisions of Jewish courts. 113
111
DAR, Yahūd, Mawlāy Ḥasan to qā’id Ḥammu al-Jīlālī, 26 Jumādā I 1307. See also what seem to be two drafts
of this letter: DAR, Yahūd, Mawlāy Ḥasan to qā’id Ḥammu al-Jīlālī, 23 Jumādā I 1307. These drafts, written only
three days after the Jews’ initial complaint to the sultan’s vizier, suggest that the matter was urgent enough to
require immediate attention.
112
This was one of a number of occasions on which Mawlāy Ḥasan reminded his local representatives that they
were responsible for safeguarding Jewish legal autonomy, even in the face of Jews who actively undermined the
authority of Jewish courts: see, for instance, the initial complaint of the Jews of Meknes to the sultan’s vizier, in
which they reported that the sultan had already reprimanded al-Jīlālī for this very behabior (DAR, Yahūd, 26098, 20
Jewish judges from Meknes to Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Ṣanhājī, Jumādā I 1307). See also DAR, Yahūd, 18152,
Muḥammad Mufaḍḍal Gharrīt to Jews of Marrakesh, 7 Jumādā II 1310 and 18151, Mawlāy Ḥasan to Qā’id
Muḥammad (in Marrakesh), 7 Jumādā II 1310. These letters concern a complaint of the Jews of Marrakesh about
the qā’id Muḥammad. Mawlāy Ḥasan reprimanded Muḥammad and instructed him to send intra-Jewish lawsuits to
Jewish courts and to help the dayyanim rule on intra-Jewish matters.
113
See also DAR, Yahūd, 18151, Mawlāy Ḥasan to Muḥammad, 7 Jumādā II 1310 (in which Mawlāy Ḥasan
specified that if a Jew refused to be judged by a Jewish court, Muḥammad, the qā’id of Marrakesh, should write up a
proof (ḥujja) of the Jew’s refusal and send it to the sultan to resolve); DAR, Demnat, al-Ṭayyib al-Yamānī to
Muḥammad Bargāsh, 30 Muḥarram 1281 (in which the sultan reminded the governor of Demnat “not to interfere in
[the Jews’] religious or legal affairs” (an lā yadkhula bi-umūri dīnihim wa-shar‘ihim); it is particularly significant
that the sultan responded thus since the investigation preceding his letter to the governor of Demnat had shown that
the Jews’ protests were without legal proof (bayyina), suggesting that Mawlāy ‘Abd al-Raḥmān considered the
maintenance of Jewish legal autonomy important enough to admonish his representative in Demnat just in case).
262