ثيقة شرعيّة: T-S 28.5

الوصف

Legal document. Location: New Cairo. Dated: Tuesday, 18 Shevaṭ 1405 Seleucid = 7 February 1094 CE. Declaration by the beadle Yosef b. Shelomo ha-Kohen, that he had not delivered the bill of divorce from Hiba/Natan b. Mawhūb ha-Kohen to Sirwa bt. Hillel for nearly three years, explaining that he used to retain bills of divorce of kohanim in the hope that the couple would be able to reconcile before divorcing (as a kohen cannot marry a divorcee, including remarrying his own divorcee). The original bill of divorce was written on on 22 April 1091 CE and had been witnessed (and probably written) by the cantor Hillel b. ʿEli as well as the same beadle Yosef. While visiting Jerusalem, Yosef was asked by the divorcee's mother to deliver the document, which he now entrusts to Khalīfa b. Menashshe of ʿAkkā. Witnessed (and probably written) by Netanʾel b. Yefet he-Ḥaver (known also from Bodl. MS heb. a 3/38, ENA NS 18.1, T-S 24.1, T-S 12.1, T-S 16.192, and possibly T-S 16.212), also witnessed by Aharon b. Avraham. There is an unusual postscript (correction to the deed?) in a different hand, concluding with an ʿalāma, ישועה. Below, there is a scathing, 40-line responsum about the defects of this legal document written by the Palestinian authority ʿAmram b. Aharon b. ʿAmram ha-Kohen, descendant of the judge Eliyyahu ha-Kohen. He sarcastically adapts Jeremiah 8:22, "Is there no balm in Egypt/Fustat? Is there no physician in Cairo? Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?" ʿAmram evidently pasted the second sheet onto the first sheet in order to have sufficient space for his responsum. This ʿAmram b. Aharon may be the son-in-law of the Gaʾon Evyatar mentioned in T-S 10J24.1 (PGPID 1536); other documents of his include ENA 4010.36 + PER H 1 (PGPID 764) and potentially T-S 20.145 + T-S AS 153.176 + T-S AS 153.177 + T-S 18J5.3 (PGPID 7545). Published by M. A. Friedman, "הצרי אין במצרים אם רופא אין באלקאהרה (מסמך ממצרים על גירושי אשת כהן בסוף המאה הי"א ותגובת חכם מארץ-ישראל)," Dine lsrael 5 (1974), 205–28 (at 208–09). The responsum contains many invaluable details about court procedure and legal formulary. (Information mainly from Friedman, CUDL, and Goitein's index card.)