In this work, an attempt is made to show the identity of the Provencal Jewish tradition - a set of customs that have developed in the culture of the communities of Provence and Languedoc. This tradition significantly distinguished this sub-ethnic community from the Jews of the Iberian Peninsula, who followed the Sephardic tradition. Both of these systems were very similar in nature, since both of them (as well as many other local Jewish traditions) were based on the Oral Torah (in particular, the norms of the Mishnah and Talmud). Nevertheless, the Sephardic tradition was considered closer to the Talmudic normative framework than the Provencal one, while the latter developed with the active interaction of Jewish and non-Jewish local customs, which were intricately intertwined and turned into an updated system of spiritual attitudes, which was then passed down by the Jews of Provence and Languedoc from generation to generation as "the customs of the fathers".

The responses of 1 Rabbi Avraham Ben David (Ra'avad) of Posquiera are particularly important among the Jewish written sources from Provence, which are generally small in number, especially if we are talking about the corpus of texts of the XI-XII centuries. First, they are a relatively large group of texts. Secondly, they are distinguished by a variety of topics and, therefore, open up a vast space for research. Third, the influence of Ra'avad on the traditions of Provençal Jewry was very noticeable.

The medieval literature of responses created by or directly related to Provencal Jewry has been studied only fragmentally. There are studies of individual texts, for example A. Neubauer, who published one of Rashb's responses [Neubauer, 1886, p. 80-94], as well as I. Loeb [Loeb, 1887, p.70-98] and R. Ben - Shalom (a study of Rivash's response No. 266 using notarial acts) [Ben-Shalom, 2001, p. 9-41].

The phenomenon that the sages of Provence called the "custom of the fathers" was formed as a complex complex of various traditions under the influence of various factors. It is based on the Oral Torah, but it is the Provencal customs, introduced into traditional Jewish culture by the Provencal way of life, that gave a special shade to the "custom of the fathers".

During the Ra'avad period, many centers of Jewish scholarship were located on the Mediterranean coast of what is now France. According to the description of Benjamin's journey from Tudela (XII century) [Book of Wanderings..., 2004, pp. 67-72],

Responses -1 are the correspondence of rabbis among themselves and with representatives of Jewish communities. The term is an abbreviated translation from the name of this source from Hebrew (sheelot u-teshuvot-questions and answers).

page 18
Large Jewish communities were located in Narbonne, Montpellier, Beziers, Lunel (Languedoc), as well as in Aix, Arles, Marseille (Provence). There, original forms of Jewish culture were formed, in which the court and judicial customs did not occupy the last place, although little information has been preserved about this.

The development of Jewish judicial institutions was studied mainly through the prism of the impact of French and Catalan traditions on the communities of Provence and Languedoc [Benedikt, 1985, p. 24], while the original features of the culture of these communities often escaped the attention of historians and philologists, although there was interest in this problem. For example, I. Ta-Shma investigated the interpretation of the plots of apocryphal literature in Provence in the XI century (Ta-Shma, 2001).

The Sephardic image of Provencal Jewry, and especially Languedoc communities, was created partly due to the predominance of philological studies of manuscripts from this region, the oldest of which date back to the 15th century and appear in the works of scholars as the Provencal-Sephardic script, similar to the texts mentioned in the work of A. Tal [Tal, 2005, p.121]. In particular, one of the manuscripts used in the work of this researcher was dated to the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries, but it contained a response associated with the name of the Provencal Rabbi Avraham Bar Isaac Av Bet Din, one of the outstanding halakhic experts of the 12th century (Tal, 2005, p.122). He was the author of Eshkol , the first known Halakhic treatise from Provence. In general, we know very little about the origin of the Hebrew manuscripts written in the twelfth and fourteenth centuries. In most cases, it is difficult to say whether these texts are of Provençal or Sephardic origin.

After the Almohad conquest of the southern Iberian Peninsula in the 1140s, a mass migration of Jews from Spain to Provence began, which led to some changes in the composition of local sub-ethnic groups and to the formation of an environment in Provence that was more susceptible to Spanish influence than to the Provencal tradition. These changes later developed into a trend that developed due to the penetration of the political power of the Aragonese Crown in the areas east of Languedoc in the second half of the twelfth century.

The earliest examples of responses from Provence and Languedoc date back to the twelfth century, so Rabbi Avraham Av Bet Din can be considered one of the first known authors of such sources. The texts associated with his name discuss various aspects of Jewish ritual: blessing, ritual slaughter of livestock, the problem of mixing various substances or objects (a number of mixtures of food products, plant fibers, combinations of animals in harness, etc. are prohibited in Judaism), etc.

In terms of the variety of topics, Avraham Av Bet Din's responses are inferior to the sources associated with the name of Ra'avad of Posquiera. In particular, Avraham Ben David is the author of the first extant letters from Provence, which contain detailed descriptions of the activities of the courts. He was a disciple of the aforementioned Rabbi Avraham Av Bet Din and thus was strongly influenced by the Catalan tradition himself, 2 but he was nevertheless one of the most persistent defenders of Provencal customs.

Most of the responses written by Ra'avad are in the manuscript collection of the National Library of Jerusalem. A small number is available in the Paris Museum of Manuscripts. The rest of the texts have come down to us in collections compiled in a later period, for example, Individual responses of the Ra'avad were included in the works of other Jewish authors: Rabbi Aharo-

2 The book of Eshkol, written by Rabbi Avraham Av Bet Din, is essentially a retelling of the work of Catalan Rabbi Yehuda Barceloni.

page 19
on Ha-Cohen of Lunel, Isaac Ben Emmanuel of Lats, Rabbi Menuach (author of the commentary on the Rambam's Mishnah Torah), Rabbi Isaac Ha-Sardi, Rabbi Tzidkiah Ha-Rofe, Rashba, and others. Ra'avad's responses were partially published by M. Gershler [Rabad, 1964, p. 6], E. Urbach [Mazkeret, 1962], and S. Asaf [Asaf, 1932], and the most complete edition is the 1964 edition with a foreword by Yosef Kapakh [Rabad, 1964].

It should be clarified that Ra'avad's legacy is impressive only in comparison with other groups of Provençal Jewish sources. The largest part of the published texts of responses, in particular those related to the history of Jewish courts in Provence and Languedoc, are sources from Catalonia associated with the name of Rabbi Shlomo Ben Adret (1235-1310) from Barcelona. Provencal sources of the same time (there are several dozens of them) are collected in the publication of A. Sofer (Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967). Most of their photocopies are located in the Manuscripts department of the National Library of Jerusalem. From later texts (also Spanish), we have Rivash's responses [Sheelot u-tshuvot... 1979, p. 76, 140, 218] and Rabbi Nissim Gerondi [Sefer sheelot..., 1971, p. 4] (very few), as well as a small number of other texts [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p. 321-435].

Ra'avad himself was a member of the court, which operated on a regular basis. In some of his texts, he described his own experience of legal proceedings [Rabad, 1964, pp. 122-132], which gives his letters a special significance.

The researcher Benjamin Ze'ev Benedikt explained the growing influence of Spanish Halakha 3 in Provence in the 12th century by the migration of a large number of Jews from Southern Spain to Provence after the Almohad conquests [Benedikt, 1985, p. 19]. At that time, for economic and political reasons, the city of Narbonne lost its former status, and thus this center of Torah study fell into disrepair [Benedikt, 1985, p.20]. The status of the most important rabbinic academy was given to the Lunel Yeshiva, which flourished especially under the leadership of Rabbi Meshullam Bar Yaakov. The Lunel Yeshiva became so famous that even scholars from Spain used to come there to study [Benedikt, 1985, p. 23].B. Z. Benedikt believed that the Lunel Torah School did not create an original tradition, since it was under Spanish influence [Benedikt, 1985, p. 24]. This center of Jewish scholarship, in his opinion, served as a mediator in the dissemination of the heritage of Catalan Jewish sages in Provence. Lunel's influence extended to the whole of Provence, and their teachings were also popular in Narbonne (Benedikt, 1985, p. 23).

The author of the introduction to the 1978 edition of Rabbi Menachem Ha-Meiri's treatise "Magen Avot" called the French and German Jewish traditions the source of the formation of Provencal customs in relation to the period before the XII century. and Catalan-for a later era, when a significant part of the lands of "historical Provence" was captured by the King of Aragon [Sefer Magen..., 1978, p. 3]. The dependence on Aragon manifested itself in both the political and socio-cultural life of Jewish communities.

A serious political factor influencing the fate of Provencal Jewry was the power of the Crown of Aragon, which in the second half of the 12th century spread to the territories east of Languedoc, including a significant part of the Provencal lands. In 1172, Roussillon was inherited by King Alfonso P. Jaime I of Aragon. In 1262, the conqueror created the Kingdom of Majorca, which also included Roussillon, Cerdagne,and Montpellier, and gave it to his youngest son. The capital of this state entity was Perpignan. Until 1344, the kingdom remained formally independent, in other words, it established its own line

3 Halakha - normative aspects of Judaism that manifest themselves in the daily life of Jews or are associated with certain areas of religious practice that are not implemented in reality, but are described in important Jewish sources (for example, the service in the Jerusalem Temple).

page 20
inheritance that originates from the youngest branch of the Aragonese Tree. King Pedro IV united the two crowns and returned the said lands to full dependence on Aragon. This, however, occurred during a period of political instability in Provence, when the French monarchy was already able to move significantly south, but for more than a century the administration of Provencal lands was carried out from Barcelona.

The desire to protect the local tradition of Provence and Languedoc from external influences first affected the field of Torah study, and then manifested itself in practical Halakha, in particular in the activities of the courts. The first known protest against the influence of the Sephardic tradition in Provence was expressed in the work of Rabbi Moshe Bar Yosef, dedicated to the criticism of the commentary on the Talmud written by Rabbi Avraham Bar Isaac [Benedikt, 1985, p. 24], and Provencal interpretations of these subjects. In general, he did not reject the complex of ideas about Jewish traditional law that Benedict called "Babylonian custom" , because he considered the ties between the Spanish and Provencal yeshivas to be quite strong. Be that as it may, during this period, some Jewish leaders became convinced of the special importance of the "Provencal" school of Torah study and Provencal customs.

The position of Rabbi Moshe Bar Yosef was supported by one of his students, Rabbi Zerachia ha - Levi (c.1125-1186), who said that the interpretations of written and oral Torah that he had learned from his teachers, i.e. from the sages of Narbonne, differed from the teachings of the Spanish rabbis due to the influence of the local, Provencal tradition.

According to B. Benedikt, the ideas of Rabbi Moshe and Rabbi Zerachia did not take root in Provence and Languedoc, and, moreover, their statements caused an increase in interest in the Spanish halakhic tradition [Benedikt, 1985, p.25]. Ra'avad of Posquiera wrote a rebuttal to a book by Rabbi Zerachia, in which he criticized the works of one of the famous Spanish teachers of the law, Rabbi Isaac Alfasi (1013-1103), and his disciple, Rabbi Meir Bar Isaac of Trincetay, composed a "Book of Help" in support of Alfasi.

However, according to sources, there were a number of Spanish judicial customs that did not take root in Provence and Languedoc. A. Newman in his work mentioned such a Catalan innovation in the practice of Jewish courts as inviting notaries to collect and record witness statements [Newman, 1942, pp. 117-118]. The Provencal responses did not reflect this practice at all; on the contrary, they constantly contain references to other procedures (Wernham, 1987).

Let's try to describe and explain to some extent the practical aspects of the development of the Provencal Halacha. The existence of certain forms of judicial practice reflected in rabbinic responses was determined partly by the same motives that led to the emergence of a local school of interpretation of oral and written Torah, and partly by the needs of everyday life.

There are three factors that determined the formation of local Jewish customs: the influence of local law teachers, the lack of written regulations on any issues, and the influence of the local non-Jewish population.

According to the historian Simcha Asaf (Asaf, 1924, p. 42), judges in Spain, as well as other persons who held public positions in the Jewish community, were re-elected every year. The right to pass verdicts was usually delegated by the community to elders and sages who had a high status in the community and often had a high level of income. The number of judges varied from place to place, usually ranging from two to

4 Babylonian custom - a tradition of interpretation of the Torah associated with the Babylonian Talmud and inherited, as it was considered, by the Sephardim. Although the Babylonian Talmud was revered by most Rabbanite Jews, in various communities the customs described in the Talmud were influenced by local traditions. Gradually, the Babylonian custom began to be called the totality of Halakha that existed on the Iberian Peninsula.

page 21
five people. The scope of their powers also changed. Another type of Jewish court - the Brurim courts (literally, "chosen ones") - was formed by mutual agreement of the litigants. In fact, these temporary judges had to meet certain conditions set out in the tradition, i.e., not be enemies or close relatives of any of the parties, enjoy a good reputation and be knowledgeable in Talmudic science.

It is in Ra'avad's responses that the Brurim courts that existed in Provence are mentioned for the first time [Ra'bad, 1964, p.145]. One of these texts talked about the possibility of removing from someone the obligations sealed by an oath. In this situation, Ra'avad recommended that judges be chosen to investigate the circumstances of the oath and deliver a verdict. In Jewish tradition, an oath was considered a sacred ceremony, and it was very difficult to cancel a vow, even if both parties, that is, the one who took the oath and forced it to take it, sought to cancel its terms. The election of temporary judges is poorly covered in Provençal sources, but it seems that they were carried out in much the same way during Ra'avad's lifetime and later. Rabbi Avraham Ben David emphasized the need for negotiations between the litigants to agree on the appointment of candidates for the positions of judges (usually three).

A court consisting of Jews who enjoyed the respect of the community and a rabbi as chief judge was widespread in the Middle Ages (Newman, 1942, p. 48). S. Asaf's research [Asaf, 1924, p.46] mentions six types of Jewish courts that existed in the Middle Ages (this list applies only to courts that consisted of three judges, since, in the author's opinion, it was the most common). All of them are applicable to the description of regularly operating vessels:

1) Three judges elected by the community for a fixed term (Asaf, 1924, p. 47);

2) Three judges, of whom only one is elected by the community, and the other two are chosen by it from among the local elders;

3) one permanent judge (a rabbi who simultaneously serves as a judge or a dayan elected by the community);

4) three judges, one of whom is a permanent judge (dayan) appointed by the community, the second is personally elected by the community, and the third is the local rabbi;

5) two judges are elected, if necessary, but are not permanently active, and then the two of them elect a third member of the court;

6) the court of "parnasim" (elders).

According to A. Newman, the most widespread in the Middle Ages in Jewish communities was a judicial body consisting of people who are versed in Oral Torah, but are not professionals, and a rabbi as the chief judge [Newman, 1942, p. 48].

Responses contain information about at least five of the six named types that existed in Provence. The most common, apparently, were the second and third. However, according to the sources, there are also judicial instances that are not listed in S. Asaf's list. One of the well-known Rashba responses, or rather the question addressed to it, describes the Beit din Harishonim, whose members were elected by private individuals, namely representatives of the aggrieved party, who were not judges themselves. Moreover, in the course of the proceedings, they did not keep any records of a protocol nature, they did not conduct a check of the witness, which usually included two stages (bdik, hakir), who was not even sworn in (i.e., not forced to swear) before giving evidence. In this case, the witness, according to him, did not realize that he was in front of the judges, because the necessary procedures were not followed. Ram Ben Shalom explains this peculiarity by the multiplicity of types of judicial instances that existed in this community. This is an inaccurate statement, since there are more than two types of IP materials-

page 22
tochnikov cannot be traced. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the powers of this court were recognized, including by Rashba himself, although later another court, also consisting of three people, had to be assembled to clarify additional circumstances. In this case, among the persons who served as judges, there was also not a single "professional", i.e. a person who regularly performed the functions of a rabbi or judge [Sheelot u-tshuvot..., 1979, p. 142].

Temporary courts may have been common in the Jewish communities of Italy and Ashkenaz (Central and Eastern Europe), but they were rare in Spain, where their activities were limited by rabbinic rulings. Such courts were allowed to be used only in communities where there were no regularly re-elected judges [Ben Shalom, 2001, p. 18]. Among the Rashba responses sent to the Provençal communities, many were addressed to "brurim". An exception was the community of Narbonne, where the position of a regular judge was very high and extended to the entire community. This does not mean that other large Jewish communities, such as Carcassonne, Montpellier, and Arles, did not have regular, regularly re-elected judges. However, there was a desire in certain cases to transfer the initiative of appointing judges to private individuals. The question of the reasons for the spread of this custom has not yet been resolved. Probably, his decision is connected with the peculiarities of the mentality of people who did not want to make public a number of rather intimate circumstances (in many cases, the mention of the Brurim courts was about family matters). The diversity of judicial institutions was accompanied by the instability of the form of documents used in court and not only. Scribes ("sofrim") specially hired by the court did not always keep court records, but sometimes the judges themselves did (apparently, this custom was especially common in Brurim courts) [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p.322]. This practice also distinguishes the south of France from Spain.

The Brurim courts were strongly influenced by the Catalan tradition, as their members often turned to Spanish experts in Halakha, which in turn was due to the long-standing ties between the rabbinical academies of Provence and Spain. In addition, by their very nature, the Brurim courts were unstable, and the competence of their members was often lower than that of regular judges. Judges often found it difficult to reach a verdict and turned to more experienced rabbis for advice. However, it was not only the lack of knowledge that prompted judges or private individuals to seek the help of foreign Jewish teachers of law, but also the desire to settle differences within the community caused by socio-economic contradictions, which became more acute especially when Jews from different communities became participants in the litigation. Then contacting a person who had sufficient authority and did not belong to the communities became a very effective solution. Sometimes, however, an appeal to a recognized halakhic expert helped to change the verdict that had already been passed [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p. 321].

While the composition of the Brurim court was somewhat different from that of the regularly operating courts, their competence and scope of activity often coincided. Moreover, they often turned to" independent experts " with similar questions, for example, concerning the forms of witness statements [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p. 325-357], the required number of witnesses [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p. 327, 331], the criteria for compliance of selected witnesses with their status, the recall of witnesses, the wording oaths, methods of conducting interrogation, etc. It is quite possible that it was the practice of the Brurim courts that influenced the relatively lax attitude to the form of witness statements (when oral evidence about any contracts or transactions was accepted in the absence of documents) [Tshuvot hakhmey..., 1967, p. 69].

page 23
In general, the attitude to the form of witness statements (and probably to documentation forms in general) in Provence was less strict than in the Pyrenees. According to some sources, in order to confirm the fact of entering into a marriage contract in the absence of the document itself, judges could be satisfied with confirmation from the mouths of witnesses. It should be emphasized, however, that this particular detail was controversial, and the attitude to oral testimony was contradictory.

Texts of responses associated with the name of Avraham Ben David of Posquiera make it possible, when comparing them with later sources, for example, Rashba responses, to trace the development of ideas about the judicial documentation form (the forms themselves are mostly not preserved).

In the context of the development of ideas about the legal force of documents, called the concept of fides publica, statements that repeatedly appear in Ra'avad's responses about the need to prevent the forgery of Jewish documents (whether judicial or business documents) by non-Jews are of great interest. As one of the ways to avoid this, he suggested some ways to unify the document form. Thus, some formal indicators of the correctness of their compilation appeared in the documents, which to some extent guaranteed the truthfulness of their content.

Subsequently, judging by the responses of halakhic experts (be it Rashba, Rivash, Nissim Gerondi, etc.), various forms of court documents were established, but their composition clearly indicates that the belief in the inadmissibility of arbitrariness in the preparation of documentation became generally accepted. Nevertheless, the multiplicity of forms of texts that had legal force indicates the instability of interpretations of the concept of fides publica, which was explained by the fragmentation of Jewish society, even within the relatively small region of Provence and Languedoc.

The fear of falsification and the search for additional ways to verify documents attracted the attention of Jews in Western Europe, especially on the Mediterranean coast of France and Italy, to use the experience of Christian notaries. It is in these regions that notaries reached a high level of development already in the Middle Ages due to their versatility and convenience. The Jewish notary system itself did not develop in the Middle Ages due to the harsh corporate conditions for the existence of professional associations. Only Christians who met the conditions of the corporation could become notaries.

Methods of processing court documentation were determined by the number of participants in the process, in particular witnesses. Ra'avad argued that the signatures of two witnesses were sufficient grounds for trusting the contents of the document; in some cases, he considered it possible to limit himself to the signature of one person. Subsequently, the presence of two witnesses was considered necessary.

The responses of Ra'avad reflected the trend of transition from oral to written judicial practice, which was outlined in the 12th century in the daily legal practice of both Jewish and Christian societies. Oral forms of transactions, various contracts and legal proceedings were characteristic of certain stages of the development of customary law. The society gradually abandoned them as the law was formalized, the practice of maintaining documentation and relevant public institutions (notaries, chancellors, etc.) developed.In Jewish society, this process had its own characteristics, but in general the same trend was outlined. In one of the responses, Avraham Ben David denied the need to search for witnesses to confirm the fact of cancellation of debt obligations if there is documentary evidence of the debt, i.e. a loan agreement or receipt [Rabad, 1964, p. 180].

In another letter, he took an even tougher stance, emphasizing that debt obligations can neither be confirmed nor denied by oral consent.-

page 24
children in the absence of any documents in this regard. At the same time, the time of drawing up the document must necessarily correspond to the time of concluding the transaction [Rabad, 1964, p.196]. This problem is also discussed in later sources. Typical examples are Rivash's response No. 266 [Ben Shalom, 2001, pp. 9-41] and the manuscript describing the process of Shmuel Ibn Tibbon, studied by I. Loeb [Loeb, 1887, pp. 70-98].

The desire to emphasize the importance of local custom is repeatedly confirmed by the texts of the Ra'avad responses, in particular those devoted to legal proceedings. It was caused by several factors, for example, the influence of the local non-Jewish environment, whose foundations were very different from the peculiarities of the Spanish context. In one of the responses, Ra'avad, investigating the case of debt renewal, advised the author of the question to use local customs of non-Jews in cases where the Oral Torah does not contain any information related to a disputable situation that has arisen in real life [Ra'avad, 1964, p.175]. In his recommendation, he was guided by the consideration that in such circumstances, even if one resorted to practices used in other Jewish communities, one would still ultimately have to act according to non-Jewish custom. Therefore, it is more appropriate to refer to the local context, as it is more adapted to the needs of a given community.

The number of signatures of witnesses in documents considered in courts was determined by the number of witnesses. Based on the Talmud, Ra'avad argued that documents should be signed by two witnesses, but in some cases he considered it possible to limit himself to only one signature (Ra'avad, 1964, p. 175).

On the question of the form of witness statements, there were two opposing views. In Ra'avad's responses, there is a tendency to move from oral forms of legal proceedings to written ones. Apparently, this trend was typical not only for Jewish, but also for Christian communities (the development of notaries can serve as proof).

In one of his responses, which dealt with the cancellation of debt obligations, Ra'avad denied the need for a witness to be present in court if there was written evidence of a transaction, whether it was a contract or a receipt [Ra'avad, 1964, p.180]. In another letter, he clarified that the existence of any property obligations in general can neither be confirmed nor denied without appropriate documents. In addition, according to him, the time of drawing up the document in this case should have coincided with the time of concluding the transaction, i.e. the document confirming the terms of the transaction could not have been drawn up retroactively, even if it contained the signatures of witnesses of the parties and the content of the document corresponded to reality [Rabad, 1964, p. 196]. Apparently, this problem was considered very important in the Ra'avad era and later, as it is discussed in other sources as well. Typical examples are the response N 266-Rivash (Rabbi Isaac Bar Sheshet) [Sheelot u-tshuvot..., 1979, p. 140] and a manuscript describing the trial of Shmuel Ibn Tibbon, described by Isidore Loeb [Loeb, 1887, pp. 70-98]. They mention the facts of the court's acceptance of oral testimony about various property agreements in the absence of documents (and in some cases, even the speech of witnesses was not recorded).

The reputation that Ra'avad enjoyed among his contemporaries allowed him to make adjustments to the forms of documents, including judicial ones, of that time, which were characterized by instability. In his actions, he was guided by the desire to help judges verify documents in order to avoid the dangers associated with the use of forgeries [Rabad, 1964, p.62, 172].

The existence of the Provencal Halakhic tradition, which has undoubtedly been influenced from outside, but has retained its original features, is confirmed by numerous sources.-

page 25
sources, including the literature of responsa and treatises written by Jewish sages. For example, Rabbi Menachem Ha-Meiri composed his work "Sefer Magen Avot", motivated by the desire to protect the customs of his community from external influence. According to him, it was necessary to preserve the Provencal soil from external, foreign influences, which, as he believed, lead to discord within Jewish communities [Sefer Magen..., 1978, pp. 4-5].

The diversity of Jewish society in Provence and Languedoc, the heterogeneity of local judicial institutions, and the many factors that determined the development of the local Jewish tradition determined the different approaches to this tradition on the part of Halakhic experts. The result was the emergence of numerous contradictions between rabbis and representatives of communities. To avoid conflict, the greatest Torah scholars have devoted their writings to finding acceptable solutions. In his treatise, Rabbi Menachem Ha-Meiri suggested using the help of community leaders in the field, who will establish what local customs should be and monitor the implementation of their decisions [Sefer Magen..., 1978, p.5]. In order to avoid rivalry between adherents of different traditions, Ha-Meiri advised relying on the practice common in this community, based on the customs of the "fathers" [Sefer Magen..., 1978, p.6].

The specific nature of the Provencal tradition was manifested in the interaction of the Jewish community with the Christian environment. Due to the fact that the Sanhedrin was impossible to function in the Middle Ages and the Jewish courts in the Diaspora were not usually involved in the investigation of serious criminal crimes, incidents involving the death penalty or corporal punishment were under the jurisdiction of Christian courts.

The law of Herem (expulsion from the community) becomes the joint jurisdiction of the Jewish and Christian courts during the period of interest. This interaction was carried out according to several schemes. If the right to approve exclusion from the community itself remained with the Jewish party (as in Manoska [Shatzmiller, 1973, p. 44]), then the person punished in this way could apply to a Christian court in order to appeal the decision of the intra-community instance. In the case of Manosc, a case of this nature was brought before the Sisteron Episcopal Court. The plaintiff's complaint was directed against the rabbi and one of the judges. In other communities, for example in Arles (Benedikt, 1985, p. 24), the very question of declaring a Herem could only be raised by the Jewish community, while the decision was made by the local secular or spiritual ruler. The interest of the Christian authorities in the case of Jerem seems to have been both fiscal and political in nature. However, the sources do not give a complete picture of how the Jewish community and the Christian authorities interacted in this situation.

The material at our disposal suggests that the Jews of Provence and Languedoc have a special perception of their culture and their reverent attitude to their own customs. In the period after Ra'avad, this form of self-identification persists, which is confirmed, for example, by Rashba responses.

The judicial practice of the Jews of Provence and Languedoc cannot be studied in isolation from the Catalan tradition, whose influence was significant both in the educational system and in public life. However, due to their special features, the courts of this region cannot be considered a cast of the Spanish judicial authorities, and the customs that determined the nature of legal proceedings - a copy of Spanish regulations.

list of literature

The Book of Wanderings of Rabbi Benjamin of blessed Memory / / Three Jewish Travelers, Moscow: Mosty Kul'tury, 2004.

Asaf S. Batey ha-din u-sidreyhem ahrey hatimat ha-talmud (Courts and their procedure after the codification of the Talmud). Jerusalem: Dfus ha-Poalim, 1924.

page 26
Benedict B. Z. Merkaz ha-torah be-Provence (Center for Torah Studies in Provence). Jerusalem: Mosad ha-rav Kuk, 1985.

Ben Shalom R. Hayey ha-qehillah be-Aries u-mosdoteha. Shut ha-Ribash 266 ke-maqor histori (Life of the Jewish community in Arles and its institutions. Rivash's response No. 266 as a historical source) / / Mikhail. Vol. 12. Tel-Aviv, 2001.

Loeb I. Le Proces de Samuel ibn Tibbon. Marseille, 1255 // Revue des etudes juives. Vol. 15. Paris, 1887.

Neubauer Ad. Documents inedits // Revue des etudes juives. Vol. 12. Paris, 1886.

Newman A. The Jews in Spain. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1942.

Rabenu Abraham Ben David (Rabad). Tshuvot u-phsakim (Responses and rulings). Jerusalem: Mosad ha-rav Kuk, 1964.

Sefer Magen Avot al-yedey R. Menahem ben Shlomo ha-Meiri (A Book in Defense of the Fathers by Rabbi Menahem Ben Shlomo Ha-Meiri). Jerusalem, 1978.

Sefer Sheelot u-tshuvot le-gaon rabenu Nissim Gerondi (Book of Responses by gaon rabenu Nissim Gerondi). Jerusalem, 1971.

Shatzmiller J. Recherche sur la communaute juive de Manosque. Paris: Mouton, 1973.

Sheelot u-tshuvot Bar Sheshet. Jerusalem : Yehuda Leib Mets, 1979.

Tal A. Le-sheelat ha-kfuliyut be-teshuvat Rabi le-rabbi Meshullam me-Lunel she be-htav yad Moscow 566 (On the question of duality in the answer to Rabbi R. Meshulam from Lunel in the Moscow manuscript N 566) / / Sidra. Vol. 20. Jerusalem, 2005.

Ta-Shma I. Rabbi Moshe ha-Darshan ve-ha-sifrut ha-hitsonit (Rabbi Moshe Ha-Darshan and Non-canonical literature). Jerusalem: Turo College, 2001.

Tshuvot hakhmey Provincia (Responses of the Wise Men of Provence). Jerusalem: Dfus Akiba Josef, 1967.

Permanent link to this publication: