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.

legal procedure was relatively minor. 56 These nuances are crucial to understanding Jews’<br />

experience in sharī‘a courts, especially given the confusion surrounding the testimony of non-<br />

Muslims.<br />

Bills of Debt<br />

To get a better sense of how the Assarrafs used the sharī‘a court, it is necessary to delve<br />

deeper into the business which this family conducted before qāḍī and ‘udūl. As mentioned<br />

above, the Assarrafs turned to the sharī‘a court to notarize legal documents far more often than<br />

for litigious pursuits. A few kinds of notarial documents are especially common in the Assarraf<br />

collection, particularly bills of debt, contracts for the rent or sale of property, and releases; their<br />

abundance indicates that these were the kinds of transactions which most frequently brought the<br />

Assarrafs to the sharī‘a court.<br />

Bills of debt constitute the majority of notarial documents in the collection (about 64% of<br />

the total). The preponderance of bills of debt was not limited to the Assarrafs. Among the other<br />

sharī‘a court documents I examined, about 52% were also bills of debt. 57 It was in Jews’ interest<br />

to notarize their bills of debt with ‘udūl because contracts which conformed to Islamic legal<br />

standards were far more likely to be considered authoritative in case of litigation. As we will see<br />

shortly, qāḍīs consistently demanded legal proof of claims made in court, which essentially<br />

meant documents notarized by ‘udūl. In the event that a debtor did not repay his debts, the<br />

56 As will be discussed further below, the testimony of a lafīf was almost always used to prove that a recalcitrant<br />

debtor was bankrupt and thus unable to pay his debts; since Jews were rarely indebted to Muslims, they more rarely<br />

needed the services of a lafīf. Of course, it is possible that lafīfs are relatively rare in the Assarraf collection<br />

precisely because Jews were unable to testify in them, and thus resorted to their use more infrequently than did<br />

Muslims. Only further research in collections of sharī‘a court documents belonging to Muslim families will answer<br />

this question definitively.<br />

57 That is, 154 out of 295.<br />

85

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!