1. Ackerman-Lieberman, Phillip I., The Business of Identity: Jews, Muslims, and Economic Life in Medieval Egypt (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014), 156–193Google Scholar; Eve Krakowski, “Female Adolescence in the Cairo Geniza Documents” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2012), 213–218; Oded Zinger, “Women, Gender and Law: Marital Disputes According to Documents from the Cairo Geniza” (PhD diss. Princeton University, 2014), 201–276.

2. For some recent studies of Jewish courts in medieval Europe, see Kanarfogel, Ephraim, The Intellectual History and Rabbinic Culture of Medieval Ashkenaz (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2012), 37–84Google Scholar; Reiner, Avraham (Rami), “Rabbinical Courts in France in the Twelfth Century: Centralisation and Dispersion,” Journal of Jewish Studies 60, no. 2 (2009): 298–318Google Scholar, and the studies by Galinsky, Judah: “‘A Straightforward Path for All’: Jeruham the Exile and his Recensions of the “Guide to Justice (Sefer Meisharim),” Jewish Studies Quarterly 15 (2008): 251–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “On Popular Halakhic Literature and the Jewish Reading Audience in Fourteenth-Century Spain,” Jewish Quarterly Review 98, no. 3 (2008): 305–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Shlomo H. Pick, “The Jewish Communities of Provence before the Expulsion in 1306” (PhD diss., Bar-Ilan University, 1996), 250–262.

4. Lifshitz, Berachyahu, “The Legal Status of the Responsa Literature,” in Authority, Process and Method: Studies in Jewish Law, ed. Ben-Menachem, Hanina and Hecht, Neil S. (Amsteldijk: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1998), 59–100Google Scholar; Goitein, S.D., A Mediterranean Society, vol. 2 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), 338–339Google Scholar; Ackerman-Lieberman, The Business of Identity, 173–175.

5. Friedman, Lawrence M., “Legal Culture and Social Development,” Law & Society Review 4 (1969): 29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 34. See also Friedman, The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1975), 193–222Google Scholar; Friedman, “The Concept of Legal Culture: A Reply,” in Comparing Legal Cultures, ed. Nelken, David (Brookfield, VT: Dartmouth, 1997), 33–39Google Scholar; Tom Ginsburg, “Lawrence M. Friedman's Comparative Law,” in Law, Society, and History: Themes in the Legal Sociology and Legal History of Lawrence M. Friedman, ed. Gordon, Robert W. and Horwitz, Morton J. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 52–64Google Scholar.

6. Sharpe, James, “The People and the Law,” in Popular Culture in Seventeenth-Century England, ed. Reay, Barry (London: Croom Helm, 1985)Google Scholar, 245.

7. Kuehn, Thomas, Law, Family and Women: Toward a Legal Anthropology of Renaissance Italy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)Google Scholar; Powers, David S., Law, Society, and Culture in the Maghrib, 1300–1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wickham, Chris, Courts and Conflict in Twelfth-Century Tuscany (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Smail, Daniel Lord, The Consumption of Justice: Emotions, Publicity, and Legal Culture in Marseille, 1264–1423, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Kelleher, Marie A., The Measure of Woman: Law and Female Identity in the Crown of Aragon (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Schreiber (Sofer), Abraham, Teshuvot ḥakhmei Provinẓiah (Jerusalem: Akiva Yosef, 1967)Google Scholar, 215. Unless otherwise noted, translations in this article are my own.

9. Ta-Shma, Israel, “Kimhi, Mordecai,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, 1971)Google Scholar ; Pinchas Roth, “Ḥakhme Provans ha-me'uḥarim – Halakhah u-poske halakhah bi-derom Ẓarefat, 1215–1348” (PhD diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2012), 150–159.

10. Talmage, Frank Ephraim, David Kimhi: The Man and the Commentaries (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975)Google Scholar; Frankl, Pinkus Fritz, “Die Familie Kimchi in ihrer Ausbreitung nach Ländern und Zeiten, MGWJ 33 (1884), 552–561Google Scholar.

11. For the argument that the authority of Jewish courts had indeed deteriorated over the thirteenth century, see Pick, “The Jewish Communities of Provence before the Expulsion in 1306”, 273–275.

12. “Therefore some time ago, I withdrew my hand from [resolving] disputes” (THP, 216).

13. THP, 217.

14. Pick, Shlomo H., “‘Medieval Provençal Jewish Self-Government,” Trumah 15 (2005): 123–124Google Scholar.

15. M. Ketubot 5:6.

16. THP, 217.

17. THP, 217: “Before me came a young man who wants to divorce his wife and had made an oath against her, and I answered ‘I will not avail you.’ They called me before our lord, his highness the bishop (ha-hegmon), twice, and when he saw that I did not have it in me to hear the case, he was gracious to me and set me free. I escaped them <and then they called me> before the judge (ha-dayan), and I escaped by making sufficient explanations. Then they called me before the consul (ha-shoter), and he pressured me, forcing me to answer his questions one by one.” For shoter as a translation of consul, see Shatzmiller, Joseph, “Terminologie politique en hébreu médiéval: Jalons pour un glossaire,” REJ 142, no. 1–2 (1983): 134–135Google Scholar. On the consuls in Languedoc, see Gouron, André, “Diffusion des consulats méridionaux et expansion du droit romain aux XII^e et XIII^e siècles,” Bibliothéque de l’École des Chartes 121 (1963): 26–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18. THP, 217.

19. A childless man who declares that he will not have sex with his wife is forced to divorce her—B. Ketubot 77b; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, hilkhot ’ishut 15:7; Cohen, Jeremy, “Be Fertile and Increase, Fill the Earth and Master It”: The Ancient and Medieval Career of a Biblical Text (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989)Google Scholar, 170 n. 11.

20. Kimḥi's answer was that the situation described in this question provided grounds for divorce, but that the divorce would be imposed by the court only if the wife requested it. In the case before him, the wife wanted to preserve the marriage.

21. Since our access to these questions is provided exclusively through the lens of Kimḥi's retelling, it is likely that he rephrased them, adding a more rabbinic vocabulary to them while perhaps also emphasizing their flaws.

22. One example of a lingering problem, which was usually raised by the husband rather than the wife, was the claim that the involvement of a non-Jewish court had created undue pressure on the husband to grant the divorce. That, for example, is what happened in the case that came before Maimonides (Teshuvot ha-Rambam, ed. Blau, Joshua, vol. 2 [Jerusalem: Mekiẓe Nirdamim, 1960]Google Scholar, 354, no. 196). At other times, objections to a ruling could arise from among the general public (e.g., THP, 113).

23. THP, 162–163, no. 50. Abraham of Montpellier composed a talmudic commentary, several parts of which are extant today. Roth, “Later Provençal Sages,” 130–142; Shatzmiller, Joseph, “Megillat ha-hitnaẓlut ha-katan le-Rabi Kalonymos ben Kalonymos,” Sefunot 10 (1966): 17–18Google Scholar. The third judge, Simon ben Meir, is not known from other sources.

24. No further information is offered about this earlier incident with the governor (moshel), besides the husband's reply just below, which refers to him as lord (sar). Perhaps this is an echo of the legend of ius primae noctis? Boureau, Alain, The Lord's First Night: The Myth of the Droit de Cuissage, trans. Cochrane, Lydia G. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

25. In the original: “He remembered Vashti and what was decreed against her” (cf. Esther 2:1).

26. THP, 166.

27. A talmudic expression—B. Baba Batra 149a.

28. THP, 167.

29. THP, 170.

30. Rosen-Zvi, Ishay, The Mishnaic Sotah Ritual: Temple, Gender and Midrash, trans. Scharf, Orr (Leiden: Brill, 2012)Google Scholar.

31. M. Sotah 1:2; Rosen-Zvi, The Mishnaic Sotah Ritual, 22–37. This textual echo may have been inserted by the judge or court secretary writing up an account of the case and translating the husband's testimony into Hebrew, but the claim that he had warned his wife before witnesses surely came from the husband himself.

32. On this case, see Neubauer, Adolph, “Documents inédits,” REJ 12 (1886): 82–86Google Scholar; Loeb, Isidore, Un procès dans la famille des Ibn Tibbon (Marseille 1255–1256) (Paris: Alcan-Lévy, 1886)Google Scholar; Loeb, “Le procès de Samuel ibn Tibbon,” REJ 15 (1887): 19–55Google Scholar; Graetz, Heinrich, “Ein Eheproceß in der Familie Ibn-Tibbon,” MGWJ 36 (1887): 49–59Google Scholar.

33. As noted by Neubauer, “Documents inédits,” 86, Jacob is mentioned by Moses ibn Tibbon in his partial translation of Averroes's Epitome of Aristotle's de Anima. See also Steinschneider, Moritz, Die hebräischen Übersetzungen des Mittelalters (Berlin: Kommissionsverlag des Bibliographischen Bureaus, 1893)Google Scholar, 149. From this comment it would seem that Jacob was familiar with Samuel ibn Tibbon, and therefore probably himself originated in southern France, rather than being a native Neapolitan.

34. Martin L. Gordon, “The Rationalism of Jacob Anatoli” (PhD diss., Yeshiva University, 1974), 96–113; David Abulafia, Frederick II, A Medieval Emperor (London: Penguin Press, 1988), 255–257Google Scholar; Sirat, Colette, “Les traducteurs juifs à la cour des Rois de Sicile et de Naples,” in Traduction et Traducteurs au Moyen Age, ed. Contamine, Geneviève (Paris: C.N.R.S., 1989), 169–191Google Scholar.

35. For some deliberation on the correct reading of Biongoda's name, see Loeb, “Le procès,” 71 n. 2.

36. While many responsa reflect cases heard in rabbinic courts, they hardly ever reproduce the actual back-and-forth of the events in the courtroom. Records of actual court proceedings have survived from the early modern period—Fram, Edward, A Window on Their World: The Court Diary of Rabbi Hayyim Gundersheim, Frankfurt am Main 1773–1794 (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 2012), 20–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a rare medieval example, in a Jewish vernacular, see Lacave, José Luis, “Pleito judío por una herencia en aragones y caracteres hebreos,” Sefarad 30, no. 2 (1970): 325–337Google Scholar; 31, no. 1 (1971): 49–101 (I would like to thank Javier Castaño for this reference).

37. THP, 66. Rigo, Caterina, “Hillel ben Samuel of Verona,” in Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Craig, Edward (London: Routledge, 1998)Google Scholar.

38. THP, 54–65, no. 10. For other halakhic statements by this figure, see Levi, Israel, “Un recueil de consultations inédites de rabbins de la France méridionale,” REJ 39 (1899)Google Scholar: 238; Sefer ha-me'orot ve-sefer ha-hashlamah, berakhot pesaḥim, ed. Blau, Moshe Yehudah (Brooklyn: Deutsch, 1964), 363–366Google Scholar.

39. A strikingly similar case was brought before Maimonides in Egypt—two months after a woman was engaged to one man, a second man came forward claiming to hold proof that her father had betrothed her to him. There, however, the woman was not married to either man but merely engaged. Maimonides, Teshuvot ha-Rambam, 352–354, no. 196 and 639, no. 364.

40. THP, 55.

41. THP, 71–75.

42. THP, 78–85. Abraham's disqualification of Mordekhai ben Yekutiel was based on the testimony of two further witnesses. Mordekhai ben Meir, one of Abraham's witnesses, was then accused by Samuel ibn Tibbon of having caused David ben Isaac of Marseilles to be caught by a Christian knight and held captive in Meyreuil, near Aix. Abraham then brought David of Marseilles, who testified that Mordekhai ben Meir was not involved in his captivity. Changing tack, Samuel ibn Tibbon brought other Jews who claimed that Mordekhai ben Meir had harmed them, to which Abraham responded by bringing witnesses that this Mordekhai had since repented publicly for his actions. Mordekhai ben Meir himself appeared in court and denied at least part of the wrongdoing of which he was accused. Coming back to Mordekhai ben Yekutiel, Abraham brought two witnesses to prove he was a usurer. Samuel claimed he could disqualify these witnesses, but did not bring proof.

43. Shochetman, Eliav, Seder ha-din le-'or mekorot ha-mishpat ha-‘ivri (Jerusalem: Misrad Ha-mishpatim, 1988), 316–317Google Scholar. It is striking that of the two medieval discussions cited by Shochetman (317 n. 313), one concerns a case heard in a Christian court (R. Isaac ben Sheshet, Teshuvot ha-Rivash 490).

44. M. Sanhedrin 3:4; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, hilkhot ‘edut 13:15; Teshuvot Maharam mi-Rotenburg ve-ḥaverav, ed. Emanuel, Simcha (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 2012)Google Scholar, 443.

45. Smail, Consumption of Justice, 60–61, 96–98; MacCaughan, Patricia, La justice à Manosque au XIII^e siècle: Évolution et représentation (Paris: H. Champion, 2005), 129–132Google Scholar; Brundage, James A., The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 438–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46. Smail, Consumption of Justice, 98–132.

47. Smail, Consumption of Justice, 131.

48. “‘Ba‘ale rivkha” (THP, 68).

49. THP, 73. On the significance of public knowledge in medieval court cases, see Smail, Consumption of Justice, 207–213.

50. THP, 75.

51. McDougall, Sara, Bigamy and Christian Identity in Late Medieval Champagne (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012)Google Scholar, 28; Brundage, James A., Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 292–294Google Scholar, 374–375.

52. M. Yevamot 10:1; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, hilkhot gerushin 10:5; R. Solomon ibn Adret (Rashba), Teshuvot ha-Rashba 1:1189. See Loeb, “Le procès,” 75–76, for his perplexity at this assumed outcome. Rabbi Samuel Mikhtam suggested (THP, 61) that in this case, such an outcome could be avoided.

53. THP, 71. The Hebrew term used by Samuel was 'arusah. He then went on to refer to Biongoda as his espoza (Levy, Emil, Petit dictionnaire Provençal-Français [Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1966 ⁴]Google Scholar, 173).

54. M. Kiddushin 3:1; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, hilkhot ’ishut, 7:10.

55. Helmholz, Richard Henry, Marriage Litigation in Medieval England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 33–40Google Scholar; Donahue, Charles, Law, Marriage and Society in the Later Middle Ages: Arguments about Marriage in Five Courts (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007), 16–18Google Scholar; Reynolds, Philip L., “The Regional Origins of Theories about Marital Consent and Consummation during the Twelfth Century,” in Regional Variations in Matrimonial Law and Custom in Europe, 1150–1600, ed. Korpiola, Mia (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 63–69Google Scholar; Ourliac, Paul, “Notes sur le mariage à Avignon au XV^e siècle,” Recueil de memoires et travaux publiés par la société d'histoire du droit et des institutions des Anciens Pays de droit écrit 1 (1948): 56–57Google Scholar; Laribière, Geneviève, “Le marriage à Toulouse aux XIV^e et XV^e siècles,” Annales du Midi 79 (1967): 343–344Google Scholar. For later periods in which future tense betrothal was increasingly abandoned in favor of the present tense, see McSheffrey, Shannon, Marriage, Sex, and Civic Culture in Late Medieval London (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), 27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ribordy, Geneviève, “Faire les nopces”: Le marriage de la nobles française (1375–1475) (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2004), 56–58Google Scholar.

56. Johnson, Cynthia, “Marriage Agreements from Twelfth-Century Southern France,” in To Have and to Hold: Marrying and Its Documentation in Western Christendom, 400–1600, ed. Reynolds, Philip L. and Witte, John (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007)Google Scholar, 228; Cavallar, Osvaldo and Kirshner, Julius, “Making and Breaking Betrothal Contracts (“Sponsalia”) in Late Trecento Florence,” in Panta Rei: Studi dedicati a Manlio Bellomo, ed. Condorelli, Orazio (Rome: Il Cigno, 2004), 403.Google Scholar

57. Donahue, Law, Marriage and Society, 376–378.

58. THP, 82–83.

59. THP, 67–71.

60. THP, 82.

61. THP, 65, 67.

62. Donahue, Law, Marriage and Society, 20–21; Ribordy, “Faire les nopces,” 76–82; Onclin, Willy, “L'age requis pour le mariage dans la doctrine canonique médiévale,” in Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Medieval Canon Law (Vatican City: S. Congregatio de seminariis et studiorum universitatibus, 1965), 237–247Google Scholar; Corinne Marie Wieben, “A Kind of Marriage: Marriage in Dispute in Medieval Lucca (1341–1361)” (PhD diss., University of California – Santa Barbara, 2010), 105: “Of the sixteen sponsalia cases contained in this sample, nine (56%) involve some claim of nonage.”

63. Rogoziński, Jan, Power, Caste, and Law: Social Conflict in Fourteenth-Century Montpellier (Cambridge, MA: Medieval Academy of America, 1982), 84–95Google Scholar. See also Hyams, Paul, “What did Edwardian Villagers Understand by ‘Law’?,” in Medieval Society and The Manor Court, ed. Razi, Zvi and Smith, Richard Michael (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1996), 69–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pedersen, Frederik, Marriage Disputes in Medieval England (London: Hambledon, 2000), 59–84Google Scholar.

64. Davis, Natalie Zemon, Fiction in the Archives: Pardon Tales and Their Tellers in Sixteenth-Century France (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987), 19–20Google Scholar.

65. Baumgarten, Elisheva, Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 7–11Google Scholar; Baumgarten, “Shared Stories and Religious Rhetoric: R. Judah the Pious, Peter the Chanter and a Drought,”, Medieval Encounters 18, no. 1 (2012): 36–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shoham-Steiner, Ephraim, “Jews and Healing at Medieval Saints’ Shrines: Participation, Polemics, and Shared Cultures,” Harvard Theological Review 103, no. 1 (2010): 111–129Google Scholar.

66. Shatzmiller, Joseph, Shylock Reconsidered: Jews, Moneylending, and Medieval Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 104–126Google Scholar; Sibon, Juliette, “Notables juifs et noblesse urbaine chrétienne à Marseille au XIV^e siècle: Frontières labiles et limites de la marginalité,” in L'histoire des minorities est-elle une histoire marginale?, ed. Laithier, Stephanie and Vilmain, Vincent (Paris: Presses de l'Université Paris-Sorbonne, 2008), 59–71Google Scholar.

67. Soloveitchik, Haym, “Jewish and Provençal Law: A Study in Interaction,” in Mélanges Roger Aubenas (Montpellier: Faculé de droit et des sciences économiques de Montpellier, 1974), 711–723Google Scholar; Soloveitchik, “A Note on the Penetration of Roman Law in Provence,” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiednis 40 (1972): 227–229Google Scholar; Soloveitchik, “Rabad of Posquieres: A Programmatic Essay,” in Studies in the History of Jewish Society in the Middle Ages and in the Modern Period, ed. Etkes, Emanuel and Salmon, Yosef (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1980), 31–36Google Scholar. See also Soloveitchik, Collected Essays, vol. 1 (Oxford: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2013), 142–150Google Scholar.

68. Emanuel, Simcha, “The Struggle for Provençal Halakhic Independence in the Thirteenth Century,” Hispania Judaica Bulletin 9 (2013): 11–14Google Scholar; Soloveitchik, Haym, “A Response to Rabbi Ephraim Buckwold's Critique of ‘Rabad of Posquières: A Programmatic Essay’,” The Torah u-Madda Journal 14 (2006–2007): 203–213Google Scholar.

69. THP, 55–60, no. 10.

70. Age: THP, 60. Language: THP, 64.

71. THP, 64. This claim does not appear in the court protocol in its present form, and is known only from Rabbi Samuel ben Joseph's responsum.

72. B. Gittin 89b; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, hilkhot ’ishut 4:13 and Rabad's gloss ad loc.

73. THP, 69, 71.

74. Rakover, Nachum, Ha-sheliḥut ve-ha-harsha'ah ba-mishpat ha-‘ivri (Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1972), 308–353Google Scholar.

75. THP, 71–77.

76. Citations of Sefer ha–‘ittur: THP, 72; 74 no. 82; 75 no. 85.

77. Mordechai Glatzer, “‘Ittur soferim (Sefer ha-‘ittur) la-Rav Yiẓḥak ben Rav Abba Mari” (PhD diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1983). The halakhic monographs of the Geonim could also have served such a purpose, particularly Hai Gaon's Sefer ha-mekaḥ ve-ha-memkar, which was available in Hebrew translation in southern France from the twelfth century. Brody, Robert, The Geonim of Babylonia and the Shaping of Medieval Jewish Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998), 263–266Google Scholar. Nevertheless, these monographs do not seem to have played the same kind of role in thirteenth-century Provence, and one reason for that may be that they predate the highly influential work of Rabbi Isaac Alfasi.

78. For a similar state of partial knowledge of Jewish legal texts among Jewish judges in Spain, see Galinsky, “A Straightforward Path for All,” and “On Popular Halakhic Literature.” The Mishneh Torah of Maimonides may also have played a role in the dissemination of Jewish legal knowledge—see the comment by Silver, Daniel Jeremy, Maimonidean Criticism and the Maimonidean Controversy 1180–1240 (Leiden: Brill, 1965)Google Scholar, 129 n. 3. However, as readers at the time were sorely aware, the Mishneh Torah does not reveal its sources, and it was therefore less useful for a lawyer seeking an impressive array of citations, in contrast to Sefer ha-‘ittur, which abounds with citations of geonic and Provençal sources.

79. Rabbi Solomon ben Abraham ibn Adret, Teshuvot ha-Rashba, 1:940. The superscription to Rabbi Joseph ben Abraham Barukh ben Neriah of Avignon is found in MS Cambridge, Add. 500, fol. 246b.

80. Brundage, Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession; Reynolds, Susan, “The Emergence of Professional Law in the Long Twelfth Century,” Law and History Review 21, no. 2 (2003): 347–366Google Scholar.

81. Assaf, Simhah, Batei ha-din ve-sidrehem aḥarei ḥatimat ha-talmud (Jerusalem: Ha-po‘alim, 1924), 95–99Google Scholar; Shohet, David Menahem, The Jewish Court in the Middle Ages (New York: Hermon Press, 1931), 202–204Google Scholar; Zimmer, Eric, Harmony and Discord: An Analysis of the Decline of Jewish Self-Government in 15^th Century Central Europe (New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1970), 84–84Google Scholar; Dinari, Yedidya Alter, Ḥakhmei Ashkenaz be-shilhe yemei ha-benayim: Darkehem ve-khitvehem be-halakhah (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1984), 128–132Google Scholar.

82. Shatzmiller, Joseph, Recherches sur la communauté juive de Manosque au Moyen Âge (Paris: Mouton, 1973), 84–92Google Scholar.

83. Emanuel, “The Struggle for Provençal Halakhic Independence in the Thirteenth Century”; Sirat, Colette, “Paléographie hébraïque médièvale,”, Annuaire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études (1971/1972): 399Google Scholar; Burns, Robert I., Jews in Notarial Culture: Latinate Wills in Mediterranean Spain, 1250–1350 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996)Google Scholar, 211 n. 3.

84. Wernham, Monique, La communauté juive de Salon-de-Provence d'aprés les actes notaries 1391–1435 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1987), 191–205Google Scholar; Michaud, Francine, Un signe des temps: Accroisement des crises familiales autour du patrimoine à Marseille à la fin du XIII^e siècle (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1994), 28–29Google Scholar; Sibon, Juliette, Les Juifs de Marseille au XIV^e siècle (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 2011), 279–283Google Scholar.

85. Rustow, Marina, Heresy and the Politics of Community: The Jews of the Fatimid Caliphate (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008), 72–73Google Scholar; Simonsohn, Uriel, A Common Justice: The Legal Allegiances of Christians and Jews under Early Islam (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011), 174–182Google Scholar; Goldberg, Jessica L., Trade and Institutions in the Medieval Mediterranean: The Genizah Merchants and Their Business World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 159–164Google Scholar.

86. Sartori, Paolo and Shahar, Ido, “Legal Pluralism in Muslim-Majority Colonies: Mapping the Terrain,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 55, no. 4–5 (2012): 656Google Scholar. See also von Benda-Beckmann, Keebet, “Forum Shopping and Shopping Forums: Dispute Processing in a Minangkabau Village in West Sumatra,” Journal of Legal Pluralism 19 (1981): 117–159Google Scholar; Shahar, Ido, “Legal Pluralism and the Study of Shari‘a Courts,” Islamic Law and Society 15 (2008): 112–141Google Scholar. Within a single culture, it might be possible to isolate the purely financial aspects of forum shopping—see, e.g., Klerman, Daniel, “Jurisdictional Competition and the Evolution of the Common Law,” University of Chicago Law Review 74, no. 3 (2007): 1179–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87. Urbach, Ephraim E., Ba‘ale ha-tosafot: Toldotehem, ḥiburehem, shitatam (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1980)Google Scholar, 486. See also Shatzmiller, Joseph, “Rabbi Isaac Ha-Cohen of Manosque and His Son Rabbi Peretz: The Rabbinate and Its Professionalization in the Fourteenth Century,” in Jewish History: Essays in Honour of Chimen Abramsky, ed. Rapoport-Albert, Ada and Zipperstein, Steven J. (London: Peter Halban, 1988), 72–75Google Scholar, for the involvement of French rabbis in two disputes in northern Provence.

88. On the twelfth-century Marseilles court, see Avraham (Rami) Reiner, “Rabbenu Tam u-bene doro: Kesharim, hashpa‘ot ve-darke limudo ba-talmud” (PhD diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2002), 237–270; Reiner, “From France to Provence: The Assimilation of the Tosafists' Innovations in the Provençal Talmudic Tradition,” Journal of Jewish Studies 65, no. 1 (2014): 77–87. THP 198–200, no. 59 contains a letter to Rabbi Mordekhai Kimḥi and his son Isaac in Carpentras, protesting their interference in a case from Marseilles. Loeb, “Un procès,” 17–18 claimed that the court in the Ibn Tibbon case was convened in Montpellier, but I see no evidence to support that assumption.

89. For a description of the first two courts, see THP, 70–71. The protocol preserved in THP is from the third court.