writing in letters exchanged between merchants or family members. Mark Cohen has demonstrated that authors of Hebrew letters found in the Geniza employ loan translations of Arabic locutions; examples include Jewish versions of the basmallah, certain epithets for God, opening and closing formulas, blessings for the addressee, and wishes that the addressee’s enemies be thwarted.50 In some cases, certain Hebrew words absorb the semantic force of their Arabic equivalents or cognates (shelomot = salāma; ne‘imot = ni‘ma; haṣlaḥa = tawfīq). Like Arabic letters, Hebrew counterparts sometimes incorporate Hebrew poetry or rhymed prose within the body of the letter.51 Hebrew held a certain cachet and was used even when both correspondents knew Arabic (as mentioned, this was also the case when Aramaic was the lingua franca of the Near East). The historical Jewish language was important in delineating boundaries for a specific community of learned Jewish men. Still, the spirit of their writing remained that of the Arabic milieu in which they lived.52
Figure 3. Epistolary formulary. TS J 3.3 (2r). Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.
Titulature
Another hallmark of letters of Arabic-speaking Jews from the Islamic Mediterranean is the addressing of a recipient, whether of higher or lower rank, with a series of appropriate terms and epithets that can be in Hebrew and/or Judeo-Arabic. This can be as simple as the ubiquitous “Our master and teacher” (mareinu ve-rabeinu) or as complicated as several lines of carefully chosen and rhetorically sophisticated phrases. In certain circumstances, the epithets selected represent actual titles that were bestowed upon their bearers in an official sense. In other cases, the epithets evoke the style of formal titles but are actually devoid of official function. It is not always easy to distinguish the official from the unofficial, but in either case, the formulations are telling measures of Jewish notions of power and “statecraft” and bear the stamp of Islamic titulature practices.53
Addressing a powerful figure in the medieval Islamic world was a highly ritualized act that adhered to fairly strict conventions. This was the case whether the “encounter” was in person or in writing.54 Caliphs, wazīrs, governors, scribes, and judges all expected to be addressed with strings of titles that marked their elevated status. As Islamic civilization developed an increasingly formalized political structure, the laqab (lit., “nickname”) was transformed from being a rather nonspecific form of admiration to an official, fixed, and prestigious honorific. Caliphs claimed laqabs for themselves as regnal titles and reserved the right to bestow them upon their favorites. Caliphs and other high-ranking officials often signed documents with nothing but their honorary titles, insignia known as ‘alāmas specific to the individuals.
Most cynically, Muslim historians quipped that titles were bestowed upon underlings with liberality because the caliphate had nothing real to offer them (such as money, a practice that has been followed well by university administrators). Yet such honorifics were an essential part of the political machinery of Eastern Islamic lands and also enjoyed more limited usage in the Islamic West.55 The terms selected convey ideals of the state, and the trained eye can glean a tremendous amount from such titles and epithets of address. The types of titles selected changed from one Islamic dynasty to another and were likely formulated in reaction to one another. The tenth century, it has been observed, witnessed the proliferation of compound honorifics, including as their second terms words like dīn, “faith”; and dawla or mulk, “secular power,” or less commonly, compounded with umma, “nation” and milla, “religious community.”56 Kramers argues that titles stressing worldly political affiliation, popular among the Shi‘ite Fatimids, were rejected by later Sunni dynasties in favor of titles stressing religious advocacy and fidelity.57
Titles of caliphs and other officials from Fatimid and Ayyubid Egypt are preserved in the handful of petitions addressed to powerful men by those of lower rank (including the truly lowly) found in the Cairo Geniza and the archive of Saint Catherine’s monastery in the Sinai desert.58 S. M. Stern published three petitions addressed to Fatimid caliphs or viziers, all of whom seemed to expect a high degree of honorary “verbiage” when addressed. Marina Rustow and Geoffrey Khan are doing more work in this area presently. The formulas of titles in these documents do not merely list flattering praises but reflect fundamental conceptions of the state. The Fatimid caliph is referred to repeatedly with phrases such as “Justice of the prophetic dynasty” (‘adl aldawla al-nabawiyya); the wazīr Ṭalā’i is “the Most Excellent Lord, the Pious King,59 Helper of Imams, Averter of Misfortune, Commander of the Armies, Sword of Islam, Succor of Mankind, Protector of the Qadis and the Muslims, Guide of the petitioners among the Believers.”60 And so forth.
Jews followed standard titulature practices when referring to Muslim leaders in Fatimid Egypt.61 A Jewish petitioner addressed Caliph al-Āmir (1101–30) “our Lord and Master, the Imām al-Āmir bi-Aḥkām Allah, Commander of the Faithful” and “the pure and noble prophetic Presence” (al-maqām al-nabawī al-ṭāhir al-sharīf).62 Similarly, TS NS 110.26r (Figure 4), published by Goitein, is composed in a mixture of Hebrew, Arabic, and Judeo-Arabic (Hebrew in plain font, Judeo-Arabic in italics, Arabic script in bold italics): “leader of the sons of Qedar, our lord and master the Imām … the great king, the Imām al-Āmir bi-Aḥkām Allah, Commander of the Faithful.”63 During the second half of the twelfth century, the author of a letter offers extensive blessings for the “Place” (i.e., the ruler),64 modified with a set of adjectives in Judeo-Arabic: “the holy, descended from ‘Alī, the Imāmī, belonging to the family of the Prophet, the pure.”65 This formulation, with its focus on pure descent through Muḥammad and ‘Alī, is specific to Shi‘ite leadership and reflects Jews’ full awareness of Fatimid court practices; Jews did not hesitate to refer to the rulers’ descent from the “Prophet,” thereby glossing over the Jews’ complicated relationship with recognizing the legitimacy of Muḥammad’s prophetic claim.66
Addresses to Jewish dignitaries, whether sent from lower rank to higher or vice versa, also include lengthy lists of honorifics, a practice undoubtedly derived from the use of laqabs within Islamic society.67 In some cases, Jewish leaders signed documents with ‘alāmas, which claimed status in the same manner as Muslim leaders.68 Further, the recipient of a letter could expect to be addressed with a string of terms specific to his rank, mode of leadership (spiritual/mundane), and relationship to the author.
In many cases, honorifics served as official titles.69 Gaons bestowed titles upon subordinate representatives of the yeshivah when appointing them. As mentioned above, when Shemuel Ben ‘Eli appointed Zekhariah Ben Barkhael to the office of av bet din, he used the root lqb to describe the process of bestowing a title: “Our elevating his station (tarfī‘ manzilatihi) and our giving him the title (talqībuna) av bet din of the yeshivah.”70 In a panegyric, Sahlān Ben Avraham (d. 1050) was praised for the very fact that he held “seven titles” (kinuyyin).71 In TS 8 J 16.18r, a certain Ovadiah is addressed as the “lofty lord (al-sayyid alajall), confidant of the state (amīn al-dawla), security of kingship (thiqqat almulk).” TS NS 246.22 is an early twelfth-century list, possibly a convenient reference for a scribe, of forty-three men along with their Hebrew titles. Each entry follows the same structure: “The sobriquets (alqāb) of So-and-So.”72
Figure 4. Petition for al-Amir bi-Aḥkām Allah (Hebrew, Arabic, Judeo-Arabic). TS NS 110.26r. Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.
Bestowers
