1. Introduction
The National Library of Israel (henceforth NLI) holds two hundred and twenty textual items of what is apparently a much larger corpus emanating from Afghanistan.Footnote 2 The first twenty-nine items were purchased in 2013.Footnote 3 In 2016, the NLI acquired nearly two hundred additional items, thus enriching its collection and making it a potential source for research in various fields.Footnote 4 The NLI collection is very diverse in content, containing texts from various genres written in six languages and linguistic varieties: Early Judeo-Persian (henceforth EJP), Early New Persian, Judeo-Arabic, Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew. The collection can be roughly divided into two groups, each consisting of both literary and documentary texts. These two groups differ in many respects and do not seem to come from the same source.
The first group contains texts datable to the first half of the 5th/11th century. A significant portion of the items in this group is written in Hebrew script, mostly in EJP, but also in Hebrew, Aramaic and Judeo-Arabic. Due to the Jewish nature of many of the documents, the entire collection was titled the “Afghan Genizah”, though it is not certain that they come from a Jewish genizah. The majority of the texts in this group are letters, Islamic legal documents,Footnote 5 and incomplete ledgers written in EJP and in Early New Persian. These texts belong to the archive of a Jewish family that lived in the city of Bāmiyān during the first half of the 5th/11th century. The names of two family members, who were apparently landowners and merchants, are frequently mentioned in this archive: Abū Naṣr Yehuda b. Daniel and his son, Abū al-Ḥasan Siman-Tov. This group also contains several fragments of literary and religious texts written in EJP, Judeo-Arabic, Hebrew or Aramaic. It is quite plausible that these fragments belonged to the same Jewish family, although there is no clear evidence supporting this conjecture.
The second group consists of letters and various documents dated from the second half of the 6th/12th to the beginning of the 7th/13th century, i.e., prior to the Mongol conquest. Most of these documents are written in New Persian, with very few texts written in Arabic. Unlike the first group, this group does not contain any texts written in Hebrew script. So far, these items have not been thoroughly studied. However, they apparently originate from the area of Bāmiyān as well, as this place name is attested in several of these documents.Footnote 6 In addition, there are several undated letters and literary texts written in Arabic and in New Persian, whose affiliation to one of these groups needs further verification.
The present paper concerns eight documents from the first group, i.e. from the archive of Abū Naṣr's family, which were purchased by the NLI in 2013. These documents were drawn up in the form of the Islamic legal acknowledgment (iqrār) and written in Early New Persian between the years 395-430/1005-1039.Footnote 7 Due to their date, they may well be the earliest extant Islamic legal documents written in New Persian. As will be shown below, these documents demonstrate reliance on legal writing in Arabic of the same period, possibly indicating an early phase of legal writing in New Persian.
In what follows I bring a survey of the corpus, including its orthographic peculiarities; an edition, translation and commentary of the eight legal acknowledgment documents; and a discussion of their structure and contents within the larger frame of Islamic legal texts.
2. The acknowledgment deeds in the NLI collection
2.1 General Description
The act of acknowledgment (iqrār) was defined by Muslim jurists as a unilateral and voluntary declaration, which was made by a declarant (muqirr) in favour of a beneficiary (al-muqarr lahu) concerning an object of recognition (al-muqarr bihi).Footnote 8
Most of the acknowledgments discussed here (LD1-6, 8) concern debts of money or agricultural produce. The latest document (LD7; 430/1039) apparently concerns the lease of three parcels of land. In six documents out of eight (LD2-LD7), the name of the muqarr lahu is Abū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl; in the earliest document (LD1; 395/1005) the muqarr lahu is Ibrāhīm b. Dāniyāl. These names do not refer to the same person, as Abū Naṣr's personal name is Yehuda.Footnote 9
Short notes written in Early Judeo-Persian summarizing the details of the legal transactions were written on the verso of six documents, probably in order to enable easier identification by their owner. The names of the muqirr and the muqarr bihi always figure in these notes and occasionally more information is provided, such as the place of residence or origin of the muqirr, the year (according to the Seleucid era) and the period of repayment. The fact that the summarizing notes are written in Hebrew script supports the possibility that the owner of these document was Jewish.
It is likely that the muqarr lahu in most of the documents, namely Abū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl, had a long and personal acquaintance with the various muqirrs as some of them are identified in the summarizing notes by hypocoristic names (e.g., מצורך for Manṣūr b. Abī al-ʿAbbās in LD5; חסינך for Ḥusayn b. Ḥasan in LD7). Furthermore, as will be shown below, the names of several of these muqirrs are attested in the above-mentioned ledgers, suggesting that they were longtime business partners of Abū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl or that they leased lands from him.
In total, very few Islamic legal documents written in New Persian are datable to the first centuries of Islam up to the time of the Mongol invasion. In addition to the NLI acknowledgment deeds, I was able to find only a small number of such documents:Footnote 10 1) a marriage contract from Bāmiyān (470/1078);Footnote 11 2) a deed of sale from Khotan (501/1108);Footnote 12 3) several documents from Ardabīl (6th/12th and early 7th/13th centuries);Footnote 13 4) ca. twenty legal documents or fragments thereof, reportedly from the area of Bāmiyān (second half of the 6th/12th and early 7th/13th century);Footnote 14 5) two legal documents from the area of Balkh (545/1150 and 607/1210).Footnote 15 On the basis of this list, we may conclude that the NLI acknowledgments are possibly the earliest extant Islamic legal documents written in New Persian.
2.2 Orthography
Below I summarize some peculiar orthographical features found in the acknowledgments under discussion:
(1) The graphic representation of the phonemes ch (چ ), g (گ ), p (پ ) is not differentiated from that of j (ج ), k (ک ), b (ب ) respectively: e.g., كويد for gūyad (LD4b:2); بانزده for pānzdah (LD2:6).
(2) In several Early New Persian forms the letter fāʾ replaces the “standard” initial bāʾ.Footnote 16 The forms are shown in the table below and compared to parallel Middle Persian and New Persian spelling:
As can be seen from the table, the consonantal sound b was originally intervocalic in Middle Persian; during the transition period from Middle Persian to Early New Persian, the initial a- was lost in all the forms. The once intervocalic -b- may have undergone a process of lenition to a voiced bilabial β (or even to a labiodental v).Footnote 18 The orthographic convention for β in some ENP manuscripts (ڤ ) is not attested in the documents under discussion.Footnote 19
(3) In LD5 the consonant p is written with what seems to be a fāʾ with lower and upper dots (
for pānzdah; 1r:3). Perhaps the lower dot is written in order to indicate a plosive p, but a scribal mistake cannot be ruled out.(4) Intervocalic or (if word-final) post-vocalic d is normally written with the letter dāl, and not with dhāl,Footnote 20 except for one case where the form امذ is attested (LD8:2). Surprisingly, the letter dhāl is attested in the word کرذ, although the consonant d is not preceded by a vowel (LD4a:2).Footnote 21 It is possible, however, that the dot above the letter was written by mistake or represents a hypercorrection on the writer's part.
(5) The letter rāʾ is marked by a lower diacritical dot in two documents (LD1, LD7).Footnote 22
(6) The letter sīn is usually marked by an upper horizontal stroke.
(7) The writer of LD3 tends to add alif after a wāw (representing the long vowel -ō/-ū) in several words.Footnote 23
(8) The coordinating conjunction u- or wa- is usually represented by the letter wāw. However, in certain documents, it may appear as او (LD5, LD8), or as ا (LD3).
for pānzdah; 1r:3). Perhaps the lower dot is written in order to indicate a plosive p, but a scribal mistake cannot be ruled out.2.3. Texts: Edition, Translation and Commentary
Graphic signs used in the edition of the texts and occasionally in other parts of this study are as follows:
- [ ]
Square brackets indicate lacunas in the manuscript and may comprise partly legible letters, words or phrases and suggestions for their reconstruction.
- ( )
Round brackets indicate complementary suggestions for translation of words and phrases which do not appear in the original text.
- < >
Angular brackets indicate deletions by the authors of the documents.
- ---
Three hyphens indicate illegible text.
- a, b, c…
Superscript indicates text written above the line.
LD1
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(Jumādā I 395/March-April 1005)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.20 = 4. Paper. 33 x 26 cm. The verso is blank.
Text
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. مقر امد ابی العمیر بن ابی محمد از ونق فرکلین بتن درستی خویش وبعقل بطوع فی هیچ […]
3. اوی بود فران سبیل کهست مر ابراهیم بن دانیال را بر من پنجاه وپنج شیانی ىىـ[…]
4. حر کنیمه اوی باشد بیست وهفت ونیم شیانی واین شیانی بر من وامست لازم [وحقـ]ـی
5. اندر گردن من ومرا ازین فاز گشتن تا این حق بتمامی بدوی ندهم وحاله این تا شش ماه
6. واین خط نبشتم اندر ماه جمادی الاولی سنه خمس وتسعین وثلثمایه
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد ابو الحسین بن ابی نصر علی اقرار بلعمیر وکتب بخطه
2. شهد ابو العباس بن ابی نصر علی اقرار بلعمیر وکتب بامره
3. شهد علی رامجول علی اقرار بلعمیر وکتب بامره
4. شهد میرک بن ابی حسن علی اقرار بلعمیر وکتب بامره
5. شهد بن ابی نصر علی اقرار بلعمیر وکتب بامره
6. شهد بذلک ابی الحسین بن ابی عمر علی اقرار ابی العمیر وکتب بامره
7. شهد بذلک حسین بن حمد علی اقرار ابی العمیر وکتب بامره
Translation
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Abī al-ʿUmayr b. Abī Muḥammad from wnq frklyn acknowledged in his own sound body and in (his own sound) mind, of his own free will, with no […]
3. he(?) was(?) concerning the (following) matter: “I owe Ibrāhīm b. Dāniyāl fifty-five shiyānī […]
4. free(?), half of which being twenty-seven and a half shiyānī. This (amount of) shiyānī is an obligatory debt on me [and an obligation]
5. that rests upon me.Footnote 24 I (cannot) revoke this as long as I do not deliver to him this debt completely. This is to be transferred within six months.
6. I wrote this document in the month of Jumādā I, in the year three hundred and ninety-five”.
Witness clauses
1. Abū al-Ḥusayn b. Abī Naṣr was a witness to the acknowledgment of Bul-ʿUmayr and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
2. Abū al-ʿAbbās b. Abī Naṣr was a witness to the acknowledgment of Bul-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
3. ʿAlī b. Rāmjūl(?) was a witness to the acknowledgment of Bul-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
4. Mīrak b. Abī Ḥasan was a witness to the acknowledgment of Bul-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
5. B. Abī Naṣr was a witness to the acknowledgment of Bul-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
6. Abī al-Ḥusayn b. Abī ʿUmar was a witness herein to the acknowledgment of Abī al-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
7. Ḥusayn b. Ḥamad was a witness herein to the acknowledgment of Abī al-ʿUmayr and it was written according to his order.
Commentary
Line 2: ونق فرکلین – the reading is uncertain. The second word may be read فرگلیژ, a variant of modern Birgilīch (برگلیچ ; or Birgālich بیرگالچ ), a valley situated east of Bāmiyān and north of the road between Shibar and Bāmiyān.Footnote 25 The toponym ורגיליז֒ (wrgylyz֒), which may be a variant of Birgilīch, is attested in the fragmentary letter sent to Yehuda b. Daniel by Nāzuk b. Yosef (Ms. Heb. 8333.3 = 4, 1r:6).Footnote 26
Line 3: بر من – the reading is doubtful, and it may be read as bar way (بر وی ). However, since the acknowledgment is normally written in the subjective-style, the reading bar man is more plausible.
Line 4: حر – the reading is uncertain. The position of حر between the coin name and the half of the sum may suggest that it describes a certain quality of the coin.
Line 5: … ومرا ازین فاز گشتن تا – on the basis of other acknowledgment documents (LD2-6) in this corpus, I assume that the word nēst was mistakenly omitted.
Witness clause no. 4: رامجول – the reading is based on the Bactrian name ραμογολο.Footnote 27
Witness clause no. 5: The ism or kunya of the witness was apparently dropped by mistake.
LD2
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(Ṣafar 410/June 1019)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.17 = 4. Paper. 29.5 x 19.5 cm.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمـ [ ـن الرحیم ]2. مقر امد احمد بن محمد بتن درستی بعقل خویش
3. فی مکروهی فی ستمی کداد فاید مرا مر بو
4. نصر دانیال را هفتاد شیانی او سی طاس
5. گندم کنیمه شیانی باشد سی او پنج وان گندم
6. باشد پانزده طاس گندم وام لیزم حق واجب
7. مرا ازین فاز گشتن نیست تاین حق بدوا
8. تسلیم نکنم واین خط مر او را حجت واین خط
9. نبشته امد پنج گذشته بود از ماه صفر
10. سال فر چهار صد وده حاله این تا سه ماه
الرحمـ [ ـن الرحیم ]Witness clauses
1. شهد ابو العباس محمد بن ابی عمر وکتب بخطه
2. شهد شاهک بن ابی محمد بن ابی نصر علی اقراهما و[کتب بـ]ـخطه
3. شهد علی بن ها--- علی اقراهما وکتب بخطه
4. شهد محمد بن ابی العباس وکتب بخطه صح
Verso
כט אחמד שבאן [… גנ]דום
Translation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merci[ful, the Compassionate.]
2. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad acknowledged in his own sound body and mind,
3. without any coercion or force as follows: “It is incumbent upon me to give Bū
4. Naṣr b. Dāniyāl seventy shiyānī and thirty bowls
5. of wheat, of which half of the shiyānī being thirty-five, and that of the wheat
6. being fifteen bowls of wheat. (It is) an obligatory debt, a binding obligation.
7. I cannot revoke this as long as I do not deliver to him this debt”.
8. This document (serves as) evidence for him. This document
9. was written on the fifth (day) of the month of Ṣafar
10. in the year 410. This is to be transferred within three months.
Witness clauses
1. Abū al-ʿAbbās Muḥammad b. Abī ʿUmar was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
2. Shāhak b. Abī Muḥammad b. Abī Naṣr was a witness to the acknowledgment of both of them and [he wrote (it) in] his handwriting.
3. ʿAlī b. hʾ--- was a witness to the acknowledgment of both of them and he wrote in (it) his handwriting.
4. Muḥammad b. Abī al-ʿAbbās was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
Verso
The document of Aḥmad ShubānFootnote 28 [… wh]eat.
Commentary
Line 3: فی مکروهی – considering the context, the phrase may be understood in the sense of ghayr mukrah, which appears in Arabic legal documents.Footnote 29 This suggestion seems to be supported by the appearance of bē-karh or bē-kurh in the marriage contract from Bāmiyān.Footnote 30
Witness clauses 2, 3: اقراهما – possibly stands for اقرارهما (iqrārihimā). The mention of both parties, i.e., the muqirr and the muqarr lahu, in the witness clauses is typical of Arabic acknowledgments.Footnote 31
LD3
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(Rabiʿ II 411; 1335 of the Seleucid era/July-August 1020)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.21 = 4. Paper. 32.5 x 29.2 cm.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. همی گوایم منکه علي ابن ابوا سنین ام بعقل [بتن درستی ] خویش فی علتی از علیت ها که هست
3. افر من [مر] بوا نصر دانیال را از حسب غله دو ساله صد ا بیست طاس دو جو ا یکی گندام
4. از فام دویست هژده طاس ازین صد جو ا صد هژده گندام از شیانی صد ا بیست ا یک ا دو بر[ه ]
5. ا سه بخته نیک منکه علي بوا سنین ام ان فر [مـ]ـن حق است لزام ا وامست وجب
6. ا مرا ازان با گشتن نیست تا ان ا حق بداوی تسلیم نکنم از بر واز شیانی وا گواسپند
7. وان خط نوشته امد اندر ماه ربع الخر سال فر چهار صد ا یازده حال ان تا سه ماه
8. ---
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد محمد بن ابی منصور على اقرار علی بن ابی سنين هذا بذلک وبجميع ما فی هذا الخط من غلة سنتين وبجهة الدّين عليه من الحنطة والسلت وبالنقد التي ذكر فيه وبثلاثة اروس الخصی وبحملین وغيره وكتب بخطه صح
2. عبد الخالق بن یوسف بن العباس شهد بجمیع ما فیه وبیده کتب صح
3. شهد علی بن ابوا سنین وکتب
4. شهد ابو محمود بن ابی الحسین محمد بن عمرو علی اقراره وکتب بامره
5. شهد ابو الحسن علی بن ابی محمد بن ابی الحسین علی اقراره وکتب بخطه صح
6. شهد عبد الرحمن بن یوسف بن العباس علی اقراره بذلک وبجمیع ما فیه وکتب بخطه صح
7. شهد علی بن اسد علی اقرار وکتب بخطه
8. شهد احمد بن محمد بن ابی الحسین علی اقراره بذلک وبجمیع ما فیه وکتب بخطه
9. شهد میران با نصر وکتب بامره
10. شهد علی بوا علی وکتب بامره
Verso
// כט עלי בו סנין אדבי שהרי אׄ לשׄלהׄ ֿשלֿ[חֿ] טאס בר בֿ ברה גֿ בכתה ֿקכֿאֿ
Translation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. I, ʿAlī b. Abū Sinīn, testify in my own sound mind and [body], without any illness as follows:
3. “I owe Bū Naṣr Dāniyāl an account of grain of two years – one hundred and twenty bowls, two (thirds) of barley and one (third) of wheat;
4. a debt of two hundred and eighteen bowls, out of which one hundred being of barley and one hundred and eighteen being of wheat; one hundred and twenty-one shiyānī; two young lam[bs]
5. and three fine castrated lambs. This is a binding obligation and an obligatory debt upon [m]e, ʿAlī b. Bū Sinīn.
6. I cannot revoke this as long as I do not deliver to him this debt (that is comprised) of grain, shiyānī and sheep”.
7. This document was written in the month of Rabiʿ II, in the year four-hundred and eleven. This is to be transferred within three months.
8. ---
Witness clauses
1. Muḥammad b. Abī Manṣūr was a witness to the acknowledgment of ʿAlī b. Abī Sinīn herein and with all that is in this document: a grain of two years; the debt which is upon him of the wheat and barley; the money which was mentioned in it; the three heads of castrated (lambs); two young lambs and so forth. He wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
2. ʿAbd al-Khāliq b. Yūsuf b. al-ʿAbbās was a witness with all that is in it and he wrote (it) by his own hand. Valid.
3. ʿAlī b. Abū Sinīn was a witness and he wrote (it).
4. Abū Maḥmūd b. Abī al-Ḥusayn Muḥammad b. ʿAmr was a witness to his acknowledgment and it was written according to his order.
5. Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAlī b. Abī Muḥammad b. Abī al-Ḥusayn was a witness to his acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
6. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Yūsuf b. al-ʿAbbas was a witness herein to his acknowledgment with all that is in it, and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
7. ʿAlī b. Asad was a witness to (his) acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
8. Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Abī al-Ḥusayn was a witness herein to his acknowledgment with all that is in it and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
9. Mīrān b. Bā Naṣr was a witness and it was written according to his order.
10. ʿAlī b. Bū ʿAlī was a witness and it was written according to his order.
Verso
The document of ʿAlī Bū Sinīn Adabī Shahrī,Footnote 32 (the year) 1335, three hundred and thirty-[eight] bowls of grain, two young lambs, three castrated lambs, one hundred and twenty-one shiyānī.
Commentary
Line 2: گوایم – the verb can be also read hamē gōyam (“I state”). The writer rather regularly adds the letter alif after the wāw, as in بوا نصر (l. 3). The verb hamē gōyad is employed as the opening verb in LD4b and LD6.
علیت ها – the word ʿillε̄t is the imāla form of the Arabic plural from ʿillāt with the Persian plural suffix -(i)hā.Footnote 33 Another possibility is that considering the many misspellings in the text, especially of Arabic words, we may assume that the yāʾ between the lām and the tāʾ is redundant and the word thus should be read as ʿillat ( علت ).
Line 3: حسب – in the sense of حساب (ḥisāb). Another possible reading is حسیب (ḥisε̄b, i.e. ḥisāb with imāla). The EJP form חסיב (ḥsyb) is attested throughout the ledgers (e.g., Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 1r:10, 2r:4, 2r:5 ff.).
Line 5: لزام – a misspelling of لازم (lāzim).
وجب – a misspelling of واجب (wājib).
Line 6: با – in the sense of bāz, based on the formula: wa-ma-rā az īn βāz gashtan nēst.
ا – the purpose of the alif is not clear. Perhaps the author attached it to the letter nūn, as he does in the case of the letter wāw.
وا – in the sense of wa-az, based on structure of the clause: az burr wa-az shiyānī wa-a[z] gōspand.
گواسپند – probably stands for گوسپند (gōspand). An additional alif after the wāw was added to the word as is typical of this text.
Line 7: ربع الخر – a misspelling of ربیع الآخر (rabīʿ al-ākhar).
Line 8: I was unable to decipher this line. It may be some invocation to God, as the first word may be read as خدای (“God”), or some reference to the witness clauses below.
Witness clause 4: محمود – may also be read as Muḥammad (محمد).
Verso: עלי בו סנין אדבי שהרי – the same name is attested in a folio that was once part of a ledger (Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 16r:1).
LD4
Two Acknowledgments of a Debt
(Jumādā I 412/September 1021)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.12 = 4. Paper. 25.2 x 15.4 cm. Two separate acknowledgments were written on the recto. The summary note on the verso relates to both.
LD4a
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. اقرار کرذ ابو حرب بن الحسن ا[ز دیـ]ـه پدیژگ بتن درستی و
3. بعقل خویش فی هیچ مکروهی کفرمنست بو نصر بن دانیال
4. را هشتاذ چهار شیانی عدلی که نیمه اوی باشد چهل دو شیانی
5. عدلی حق واجب [و]ام لیزم ومرا از این فاز گشتن نیست تا این سیم بدوی
6. تسلیم نکنم حاله این تا دو ماه وذلک فی اول جمادی الاولی
7. سنه اثنا عشر واربعمایه
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد عبد الملک بن ابی الحرث وکتب بخطه
2. شهد ابو زید بن عبد
وکتب بخطه3. شهد ابو العباس بن محمد وکتب بخطه صح
وکتب بخطهLD4b
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. وهمی گوید بوحمد بن سلیمن وحسن بن الحرث بتن درستی بعقل
3. خویش فی هیچ مکروهی کفر ماست بو نصر بن دانیال را
4. بیست وهشت شیانی عدلی حقی واجب لیزم وما را
5. [از این ] فاز گشتن نیست تا [این ] سیم بدوی تسلیم نکنیم وحاله [این تا] دو ماه وذلک فی
6. اول جمادی الاو[لی سنه اثنـ]ـا عشر واربعمایه
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد عبد الملک بن الحرث وکتب بخظه
2. شهد ابو زید بن عبد
وکتب بخطه3. شهد ابو العباس بن محمد وکتب بخطه
وکتب بخطهVerso
1. קבאלה בו חרב […]ן ֿפדֿ // בוחמד סלימאן
2. חסן כֿחֿ // אז פדיז[א]ג
Translation
Recto
LD4a
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Abū Ḥarb b. al-Ḥasan f[rom the villag]e Padēzhag(?) acknowledged in his own sound body and
3. mind, without any coercion as follows: “I owe Bū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl
4. eighty-four shiyānī-yi ʿadlī, half of which being forty-two shiyānī-yi
5. ʿadlī. (It is) a binding obligation, an obligatory [d]ebt. I cannot revoke this as long as I do not deliver to him this silver”.
6. This is to be transferred within two months. This (was written) on the first of Jumādā I
7. in the year four hundred and twelve.
Witness clauses
1. ʿAbd al-Mālik b. Abī al-Ḥārith was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
2. Abū Zayd b. ʿAbd Allāh was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
3. Abū al-ʿAbbās b. Muḥammad was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
LD4b
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. And Būḥmad b. Sulaymān and Ḥasan b. al-Ḥārith state in their own sound body and mind,
3. without any coercion as follows: “We owe Bū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl
4. twenty-eight shiyānī-yi ʿadlī. (It is) a binding obligation, an obligatory (debt). We cannot
5. revoke [this] as long as we do not deliver to him [this] silver”. [This] is to be transferred [within] two months. This (was written) on
6. the first of Jumādā [I in the year] four hundred and [twel]ve.
Witness clauses
1. ʿAbd al-Mālik b. (Abī) al-Ḥārith was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
2. Abū Zayd b. ʿAbd Allāh was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
3. Abū al-ʿAbbās b. Muḥammad was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
Verso
1. The contract of Bū Ḥarb […]n eighty-four shiyānī; Bū Ḥamad Sulaymān,
2. Ḥasan twenty-eight shiyānī from Padēzhag(?)
Commentary
LD4a:
Line 1: پدیژگ – the reading relies on the (questionable) last two words of the EJP summarising note: אז פדיז[א]ג. An alternative reading may be suggested: پلیژک (Palēzhak), possibly a variant of Pālēz(h) (< Avestan pairi-daēza-); the last syllable -ak is a diminutive suffix.
There is a village named Bālīch (بالیچ ) in Sar-i Pul province and one called Balīch (بلیچ ) in Fāryāb province in present-day Afghanistan.Footnote 34 It is, however, unlikely that these are the places mentioned in the NLI collection, due to their great distance from Bāmiyān.
Line 5: لیزم – lāzim ( لازم ) with an imāla.
LD4b:
Line 2: گوید – although the verb is in the third person singular, it is clear that it refers to both debtors. Perhaps this phenomenon reflects the influence of Arabic on these documents.
بوحمد – this is a contraction of the kunya Abū Aḥmad.
الحرث – stands for الحارث (al-Ḥārith). This name can be read الحیرث (al-Ḥε̄rith) as well, i.e., al-Ḥārith with imāla. The EJP form חירת is attested once in the ledgers (Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 1r:11). The name al-Ḥε̄rith is also attested in coins minted in Badakhshān by the governor of several Samanid rulers in that region, al-Ḥārith b. Ḥ.b. According to Schwarz, the governor's name appears in three different forms: الحارث, الحرث and الحیرث.Footnote 35
Line 4: لیزم – see the comment regarding the word لیزم in LD4a.
Witness clause 1: عبد الملک بن الحرث – the word ابى (Abī) should be added, based on the first witness clause of LD4a.
الحرث – see the comment to LD4b, line 2.
LD5
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(Muḥarram 418; 1338 of the Seleucid Era/February 1027)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.25 = 4. Paper. 32.5 x 29.2 cm.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. مقر امد منصور بن ابی العباس بتـ[ـن ] درستی او بعقل تمام في جوری ستبی بطوع خوش منشی فران سبیل
3. که داد فاید مرا مر ابی نصر بن دانیال را
طاس گندم که نیمه ان باشد تا هفت او نیم طاس حـ[ ـقی ]4. واجب وامی لازم مرا از این فاز گشت نیست تا این حق براوي تسلیم نکنیم حاله این تا عا
5. شش ماه پوسته واین خط نبشته امد روز دو شنبه ده روز گذشته از ماه محرم سنه ثمان عشر واربع مایه
الرحمن الرحیم
طاس گندم که نیمه ان باشد تا هفت او نیم طاس حـ[ ـقی ]Witness clauses
1. [شـ]ـهد احمد بن ابی محمد بن عبد
[عـ]ـلی اقراره وکتب بخطه صح2. محمد بن ابی العباس بن ابی عمر شهد بما فیه وکتب بخطه
3. شهد احمد بن علی بن ابی بکر المروی [و]کتب بخطه
4. شهد شاه ابی الحسن من الجوزجان وکتب بخطه
[عـ]ـلی اقراره وکتب بخطه صحVerso
כט מצורך רוכץ בהארי אז זיר רהבאן אׄלׄשלחׄ נאמה אנדר חאלה וֿ מאה יֿהֿ טאס גנדום
Translation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Manṣūr b. Abī al-ʿAbbās acknowledged in sound bo[dy] and perfect mind, without any oppression or force, of (his own) free will (and) volition concerning the (following) matter:
3. “It is incumbent upon me to give Abī Naṣr b. Dāniyāl fifteen bowls of wheat, half of which being up to seven and a half bowls. (It is) a binding obli[gation],
4. an obligatory debt. I cannot revoke this as long as I do not deliver to him this debt”. This is to be transferred within
5. six consecutive months. This document was written on Monday, ten days passed from the month of Muḥarram, in the year four hundred and eighteen.
Witness clauses
1. Aḥmad b. Abī Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh [was a wi]tness [t]o his acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
2. Muḥammad b. Abī al-ʿAbbās b. Abī ʿUmar was a witness to that which is in it and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
3. Aḥmad b. ʿAlī b. Abī Bakr al-Marwī was a witness [and] he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
4. Shāh b. Abī al-Ḥasan from al-Jūzjān was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
Verso
The document of Maṣūrak the Rūkhaj Bahārī, from Zēr-i Rahbān, (the year) 1338, (the debt mentioned in the) document is to be transferred within six months, fifteen bowls of wheat.
Commentary
Line 2: جوری – the reading is uncertain. I assume that the last letter is yāʾ according to its shape in the word براوي (line 4).
ستبی – I take the word sitab in the sense of sitam, cf. MP forms stambag, stambagīh and istambag, istambagīh.Footnote 36 The reading ستبر (sitabr, ‘coarse’) seems less possible since the last letter is a clear yāʾ. The pair jawr-ē and sitam-ē appears in other documents of this corpus, such as LD7:2.
خوش منشی – the phrase is translated on the basis of Tarjuma-yi Tafsīr-i Ṭabarī, 41:11, where the expression ṭawʿan aw karhan (“willingly or unwillingly”) is rendered as ba-khwash-manishī yā ba-dushkhwārī.Footnote 37
Line 3: 
– it seems that the letter fāʾ here is marked by two dots: one above and the other below, perhaps in order to indicate a plosive p.
Line 5: پوسته – apparently a variant of paywasta. The word can be also read as فوسته.
Witness clause 3: المروی – the word can also be read as الموری (al-mawrī), in the sense of al-marwī.Footnote 38
Verso: מצורך – the EJP form מצורך might have undergone a phonetic process in which the nun was assimilated to the following ṣadi, and thus Manṣūr becomes Maṣūrak/Maṣṣūrak, with an added diminutive suffix -ak.
רוכץ בהארי – the nisba רוכץ בהארי relates to the place רוכץ בהאר (Rūkhaj Bahār or Rūkhach Bahār). I was unable to identify the toponym with any modern settlement near Bāmiyān. The possibility that this place is linked to the Rukhkhaj region in present-day southeastern Afghanistan is dubious.
זיר רהבאן – the second word, רהבאן (rhb'n), or דהבאן (dhb'n), can be read in three different ways: 1) rahbān (“road keeper” or “road guard”); 2) ruhbān (“monks”, the plural form of the Arabic word rāhib); 3) dihbān (“head of the village”). The first reading seems to me the most probable, and I suggest the toponym Zēr-i Rahbān. Another possibility is to split the phrase into two independent components, where Rahbān is a toponym, while az zēr (or zēr) is a prepositional phrase (or a preposition), indicating that Rahbān was topographically higher than Rūkhaj/Rūkhach Bahār. Shaul Shaked suggests that zyr rhb'n is possibly a local pronunciation of dayr-i ruhbān (“the monastery of the hermits”), which may be related to bahār (“(Buddhist) monastery”, Sanskrit vihāra-).Footnote 39 I was unable to identify these toponyms with any modern settlement near Bāmiyān.
The name מצור בולחסן from רוכץ בהאר זיר רהבאן is also attested in a folio that was once part of a ledger (Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 16r:8).
LD6
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(Jumādā II 418/July-August 1027)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.19 = 4. Paper. 45.5 x 16.4 cm.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. همی گوید ابی الحسن بن جوجه بتن درستی بعقل ورغبـ[ ـت ]
3. خویش که داد فاید مـ[ـرا] مـ[ـر] بو نصر دانیال را از
4. شیانی صد پانزده شیانی که نیمه باشد پنجاه هـ[ ـفت نیم ]
5. شیانی از گندم شست <دو> طاس که نیمه باشد
6. سی <یکی > طاس از جو هفتاد دو طاس که نیمه
7. باشد سی شش طا[ س ] این صد پانزده شیانی
8. شست طاس گندم هفتاد دو طاس جو فر من
9. که ابی الحسن ام حقی ست واجب فامی لازم
10. مرا از این باز گشتن نیست تا این شیانی برها
11. بدوی تسلیم نکنم [ حاله ] این سیم برها تا
12. سه ماه پیوسته واین خط نبشته امد اندر ماه
13. جمی دلاخر سنه ثمان عشر واربعمایه
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد میران بن محمد علی اقراره وکتب بخطه
2. شهد محمد بن ابی الحارث علی اقراره وکتب بامره
3. شهد ابی العباس ابی نصر علی اقره کتب بخطه
4. شهد عمر بن احمد علی اقراره وکتب بخطه
5. شهد شاهک بن میران وکتب بخطه
Verso
ׂכט בולחסן לגרג – ֿקיֿהֿ // ֿעבֿ טאס צוו סֿ טאס גנדום ׄאלׂשלח
Translation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Abū al-Ḥasan b. Jawja states in his own sound body and mind, of his own desi[re]
3. as follows: “It is incumbent upon m[e] to give Bū Naṣr Dāniyāl”
4. shiyānī – one hundred and fifteen shiyānī, half of which being fifty-se[ven and a half]
5. shiyānī; wheat – sixty bowls, half of which being
6. thirty bowls; barley – seventy-two bowls, half
7. of which being thirty-six bow[ls]. These one hundred and fifteen shiyānī,
8. sixty bowls of wheat and seventy-two bowls of barley are
9. a binding obligation, an obligatory debt upon me, Abū al-Ḥasan.
10. I cannot revoke this as long as I do not deliver
11. to him this shiyānī (and) the kinds of grain”. These silver (and) kinds of grain [are to be transferred] within
12. three consecutive months. This document was written in the month of
13. Jumādā II, in the year four hundred and eighteen.
Witness clauses
1. Mīrān b. Muḥammad was a witness to his acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
2. Muḥammad b. Abī al-Ḥārith was a witness to his acknowledgment and it was written according to his order.
3. Abī al-ʿAbbās b. Abī Naṣr was a witness to his acknowledgment. He wrote (it) in his handwriting.
4. ʿUmar b. Aḥmad was a witness to his acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
5. Shāhak b. Mīrān was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
Verso
The document of Bul-Ḥasan lgrg – one hundred and fifteen shiyānī, seventy-two bowls of barley, sixty bowls of wheat, (the year) 1338.
Commentary
Line 2: جوجه – the name may also be pronounced Jūja. Another possible reading is چوچه (Chūcha/Chawcha). This reading is based on the EJP form צוצה (ṣwṣh) attested in three places in the ledgers: מיראן צוצה (“Mīrān b. Jawja”; Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 5r:10); צוצה יוסף (“Jawja b. Yūsuf”; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 13v:12); בולחסן צוצה (“Būlḥasan b. Jawja”; Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 11r:10-11). Another reading suggestion is خوجه – a shortened form of خواجه (khwāja).
Line 10: برها – the reading is doubtful; I suggest interpreting the word as a plural form of the Arabic word burr with a collective meaning of grain (the author refers in the document to both wheat and barley). The EJP form בר (br) is attested on the verso of LD3 and LD7.
Line 13: جمی دلاخر – a misspelling of the month جمادی الآخر (Jumādā al-ākhar).
Witness clause 2: الحارث – this name can also be read الحیرث (al-Ḥε̄rith). See the comment to LD4b:2.
Witness clause 3: علی اقره – a misspelling of علی اقراره (ʿalā iqrārihi). This phrase can also be read as علاقره.
Verso: לגרג – this word can also be read as לגדג (lgdg). If the reading lgrg is correct, this can be a variant name of the present-day Lāgharak,Footnote 40 a village in the Shibar district of Bāmiyān province.Footnote 41
The name בולחסן לגרג, who is described in one of the ledgers as ורזי ליז̈ פריץ/פדיץ (“farmer of Lēzh pryṣ/pdyṣ”; the word ליז̈ seems to come from Bactrian λιζο, “fortress”), is attested in one of the ledgers (Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 24v:22). The toponym ליז̈ פריץ/פדיץ(with or without a diacritical mark above the letter zayin) is attested several times in the ledgers (e.g., Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 9v:2; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 9v:2, 17v:3).
LD7
Acknowledgment of Land Lease
(Rajab 430; 1350 of the Seleucid Era/March-April 1039)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.15 = 4. Paper. 31 x 21.8 cm.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. مقر امد حسین بن حسن از فیر رام کرایی بتن درستی بعقل خویش فی جوری فی ستمی
3. فران سبیل که بیامدم ودر خواستم از بو نصر بن دانیال ان جایی که
4. ان بو نصر بن دانیال است وملک اوی است در ده رام کری بغله بمدت سه سال
5. ستدم این سه پاره زمین یکی پولر یکی سویرک ویکی بر بهارک با
6. چهیل دو طاس بر دو بهر جو یکی بهر گندم انچ نیمه باشد
7. بیست طاس یک بمدت سه سال باشد صد بیست شش طاس این جای
8. بستدم تا بکارم وابادان دارم وحق ورزی بجای ارم واز کاه
9. یکی نیم خروار بمدت سه سال چهار نیم خروار وهرچ مونت اوفتد اما
10. اندک وبسیار وکاه سلطانی من حسین بن حسن بدهم وکتب فی رجب سنه ثلثین
11. اربعمایه از این کاه نیم خروار نگه کند
الرحمن الرحیمWitness clauses
1. شهد علی بن ابی بکر وکتب بخطه صح
2. شهد --- بن عبد الملک علی اقراره وکتب بخطه
3. شهد ابو القسم بلعمر بن یوسف بما فیه وکتب بخطه صح
4. والحمد
وحده
وحدهVerso
1. כט חסינך רא[ם] כראי זמין סוירך ובהארך ופולר ֿמבֿ טאס בר
2. גלה סאל ֿשנֿ
Translation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Ḥusayn b. Ḥasan from fyr of Rām K.Rī/K.Ray acknowledged in his own sound body and mind, without any oppression or force
3. concerning the (following) matter: “I came and requested from Bū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl that place, which
4. belongs to Bū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl and is under his ownership, in the village of Rām K.Rī/K.Ray, (in exchange) for grain for a period of three years.
5. I took these three plots of land: Pūlar, Sūyrak and B.r Bahārak with
6. forty-two bowls of grain, (consisting of) two parts barley and one part wheat, half of which
7. being twenty-one bowls. In a period of three years (it will become) one hundred and twenty-six bowls. I took this place
8. in order to cultivate (it), keep (it) prosperous and fulfill the obligation of cultivating (the land). (I took) from the straw
9. one and a half kharwārsFootnote 42 of straw. In a period of three years it will become four and a half kharwārs. Whatever happens to the provisions,
10. whether it be a small or large (amount), and (to) the sulṭān's straw, I, Ḥusayn b. Ḥasan, shall pay (it) off”. This was written in (the month of) Rajab, in the year
11. four hundred and thirty. He shall keep half a kharwār from this straw.
Witness clauses
1. ʿAlī b. Abī Bakr was a witness and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
2. --- b. ʿAbd al-Malik was a witness to his acknowledgment and he wrote (it) in his handwriting.
3. Abū al-Qāsim b. Bul-ʿUmar b. Yūsuf was a witness to that which is in it and he wrote (it) in his handwriting. Valid.
4. Praise be to God alone.
Verso
1. The document of Ḥusaynak of Rā[m] K.Rī/K.Ray, the land of Sūyrak, Bahārak and Pūlar, 42 bowls of grain,
2. the grain of the year (1)350.
Commentary
Line 2: فیر – doubtful reading.
رام کرای – the reading relies partially on two words written on the verso in Hebrew script: רא[ם] כראי. The forms رام کرایی and ראם כראי may be adjectives derived from the toponym ראם כרי (Rām K.Rī/K.Ray; see the following comment). These adjectival forms are not recorded in the ledgers. The only form in the ledgers which seems to be adjectival is ראם כריי (“of Rām K.Rī/K.Ray”; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 21r:9).
Line 4: رام کری – doubtful reading which is based on the EJP form ראם כרי. The latter is a toponym which is attested almost twenty times in the ledgers (e.g., אבר פסר נעמאן אז ראם כרי, i.e. “The son of Nuʿmān from Rām K.Rī/K.Ray owes …”; Ms. Heb. 8333.206 = 4, 11v:19).
Line 5: سویرک – the toponym can also be pronounced Sawīrak. The EJP form סוירג is attested in a report of the incomes of the month Marḥeshvan, the year 1337 of the Seleucid Era (=1026 ce; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 8v:12).Footnote 43
بر بهارک – the toponym is written as בהארך on the verso. The EJP form בהארך is attested in a report of the incomes of the month Marḥeshvan, the year 1337 of the Seleucid Era (=1026 ce; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 8v:11). Perhaps br is a part of the name, and not the preposition bar, which is usually written فر (βar) in these documents.
پولر – the toponym is written as פולר on the verso. The EJP form פולר is attested in a report of the incomes of the month Marḥeshvan, the year 1337 of the Seleucid Era (=1026 ce; Ms. Heb. 8333.220 = 4, 8v:9).
Although several places in present-day Afghanistan, particularly in Badakhshān province, bear the names of Bahārak and Pūlar,Footnote 44 I believe that here they designate a part of the village Rām K.Rī/K.Ray.
Line 7: بیست طاس یک – the yak above the line is a later addition written probably after the author had understood that he had made a mistake in calculating half of the sum.
خروار – may also be read as خرفار. It is more likely, however, that the third letter is a wāw, as the writer occasionally connects it to the following letter (e.g., واز in l. 8). There is some difficulty in estimating the value of this unit, since it varies according to geographic regions and historical periods.Footnote 45
Lines 9–10: مونت اوفتد اما اندک وبسیار وکاه سلطانی من حسین بن حسن بدهم – the sentence can be also translated as follows: “Whatever happens to the provisions, whether it be a small or large [amount], I, Ḥusayn b. Ḥasan, shall give my straw of the sulṭān”.
Line 10: کاه سلطانی – the phrase is unclear (it is definitely kāh and not gāh in this case). The term sulṭānī may refer to the Ghaznawid ruler,Footnote 46 but also to the authorities in general. One may suggest that some of the taxes for the Gahznawid administration in this region were paid in kind (straw or produce).Footnote 47
Line 11: نگه کند – Shaul Shaked suggests that the author may have meant nigah kunēd (نگه کنید) in the sense of “pay attention”; this note might have been added after the text had been formulated, as an afterthought.Footnote 48 The following translation may be then suggested: “Pay attention to half of a kharwār from this straw”.
Verso: רא[ם] כראי – see the comment above on رام کرای.
LD8
Acknowledgment of a Debt
(fragmentary; undated)
Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.11 = 4. Paper. 16.5 x 19 cm. A small fragment of what seems to be an acknowledgment of a debt. The verso is blank.
Text
Recto
1. بسم
الرحمن الرحیم2. مقر امذ میران بن میرک بتن درستی او بعقل تـ[ ـمام ] فی جو[ر]ی فی [ ستمی (؟)…]
3. صد او هشت شیانی عدلی وزنی کنیمه این باشد پنجاه او چهار [شیانی …]
الرحمن الرحیمTranslation
Recto
1. In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.
2. Mīrān b. Mīrak acknowledged in sound body and perfect mind, without any oppression without [any force(?)…]
3. one hundred and eight shiyānī-yi ʿadlī, weighed, half of which being fifty-four [shiyānī…].
Commentary
Line 3: وزنی – the literal meaning of waznī is ‘related or pertaining to weight’ or ‘heavy’. In the field of jurisprudence it may even refer to objects sold and bought by weight.Footnote 49 It can also be understood, though, as ‘weighed’, or even in the sense of the Arabic term wāzin or mawzūn (“of full weight”), which appears in legal documents from various periods in referring to coins of different kinds.Footnote 50
3. Discussion
3.1. Vernacular Terms
Two oft-repeated terms in these documents – ṭās and shiyānī – may be vernacular terms in use for units of measurement and currency. The term ṭās (lit., “bowl”; written طاس or טאס) appears as the measuring unit for wheat or barley in several legal acknowledgments (LD2, LD3, LD5, LD6, LD7). However, I have not come across this word as a weight or volume unit in other sources outside this family archive, and have translated it simply as “bowl”. The term may have been a vernacular designation for a more familiar measuring unit, or simply a local measuring unit not prevalent in other areas.
The shiyānī, which appears in the works of a number of authors and poets from 5th/11th-century Khurāsān, was most probably a term for a silver coin, and therefore used as a vernacular designation of the dirham.Footnote 51
In the discussed documents the shiyānī is usually not accompanied by epithets descriptive of its quality. However, the term ʿadlī is assigned to the shiyānī coin in three acknowledgments (LD4a, LD4b, LD8). The term ʿadlī is attested in a verse from a qaṣīda by Manuchihrī (d. ca. 432/1040-1) datable to the year 427/1035-36.Footnote 52 This verse relates that Manuchihrī's patron bestowed a badra-yi ʿadlī carried on the back of an elephant, on the poets from Ray, Gurgān and Shirwān.Footnote 53 According to Muḥammad Dabīr-Siyāqī, the editor of Manuchihrī's Dīwān, this verse alludes to an event recorded in the Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī – the celebration of ʿid al-fiṭr in the year 422/1031.Footnote 54 During the celebration, the Ghaznawid ruler Masʿūd (d. 432/1041) gave large sums of money to poets: 50,000 dirhams to ʿAlawī Zaynabī, which were carried to his house on an elephant; 20,000 dirhams to less well-known poets; 1,000 dinārs to ʿUnṣurī.Footnote 55 The fact that the term ʿadlī was chosen in order to describe the wealth of the Ghaznawid ruler and his generosity towards his court poets may suggest that the ʿadlī was a dirham of high quality. That ʿadlī was a high-quality coin seems to be also supported by a panegyric poem by ʿUnsurī (d. 431/1039) dedicated to the Ghaznawid ruler Maḥmūd (d. 421/1030), where ʿadlī is coupled with the word jaʿfarī,Footnote 56 the meaning of which, according to Persian lexicons, is “pure gold”.Footnote 57
It is noteworthy that the term ʿadlī was used mainly for copper coins (fals, pl. fulūs) throughout the history of Transoxania.Footnote 58 There is no way of verifying whether there is any connection between the shiyānī-yi ʿadlī of the 5th/11th century and the ʿadlī of Transoxania. As seen above, the shiyānī-yi ʿadlī is apparently not a copper coin or an equivalent thereof, as is the ʿadlī.
In many cases the dirham or dīnār were known by an attributive that referred to the name or title of the issuing ruler.Footnote 59 It is possible, therefore, that ʿadlī refers to the honorific title of a certain Ghaznawid ruler, as in the neighbouring Qarakhanid and Buyid territories. In a legal compendium of Ḥanafī law titled al-Fatāwā al-Hindiyya (also known as al-Fatāwā al-ʿĀlamgīriyya), compiled by the order of the Moghul emperor Awrangzīb ʿĀlamgīr (d. 1118/1707) between the years 1075-1083/1664-1672,Footnote 60 we find a waqf document concerning the establishment of a madrasa from the time of the Qarakhanid ruler Ibrāhīm Ṭamghāj Khān (d. ca. 460/1068).Footnote 61 At the beginning of the document, the ruler is titled al-muʾayyad al-ʿadl,Footnote 62 and later the dirhams are described as muʾayyadiyya ʿadliyya.Footnote 63 The title al-muʾayyad al-ʿadl (or muʾayyad al-ʿadl) also appears on coins of the Qarakhanid rulers Naṣr b. ʿAlī (d. ca. 403/1012-1013), Muḥammad b. Naṣr (d. ca. 444/1052) and Ibrāhīm Ṭamghāj Khān.Footnote 64 As far as I know, there is no evidence that the coins issued by Qarakhanid rulers before Ibrāhīm were described as muʾayyadī ʿadlī.
As regards the Buyids, the titles al-amīr al-ʿādil (sometimes spelled al-amīr al-ʿadl) and later al-malik al-ʿādil (sometimes spelled al-malik al-ʿadl) are attested on the coins of several members of this dynasty.Footnote 65 These titles gave their name to a certain coin that came to be known as dirham ʿadlī.Footnote 66 The term dirham ʿadlī is found in several literary works. According to Khizānat al-adab wa-lubb lubāb lisān al-ʿarab by al-Baghdādī (d. 1093/1682), one of ʿAḍud al-Dawla's gifts to al-Mutanabbī was a badra of darāhim ʿadliyya.Footnote 67 Al-Nuwayrī (d. 732/1332) brings an account in his Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, in which darāhim ʿadliyya are noted among the treasures plundered by Bahāʾ al-Dawla from Ṣamṣām al-Dawla's treasury in Arrajān.Footnote 68 Further, in one of the manuscripts of al-Maqdisī's Aḥsan al-taqāsīm, ʿadlī is the name of a dirham of fine quality (jayyid) minted by the Daylamites.Footnote 69
As far as I know, there is no evidence that Qarakhanid or Buyid currency was prevalent in the locality of Abū Naṣr, i.e., Bāmiyān. The title al-muʾayyad al-ʿadl was apparently not used for the rulers of the Bāmiyān area at that time, i.e., the Ghaznawids.Footnote 70 Although the phrase muʾayyad al-ʿadl appears on the gates of the tomb of Maḥmūd, it was carved there no earlier than the 6th/12th century.Footnote 71 I did not find any evidence for the use of the title al-malik al-ʿādil by the Ghaznawids, either. However, the title amīr-i ʿādil is attributed to Sebüktegin (but not to his successors) in several places in Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī.Footnote 72 This may serve as a plausible explanation for the use of ʿadlī. However, if the term ʿadlī does not derive from a certain title of a ruler, it might refer to another element on the coins' legend – the word ʿadl. This word is attested on the obverse of a silver coin issued in the Samanid and Ghaznawid periods.Footnote 73
Another possibility is that ʿadlī was a denominational name.Footnote 74 This term is known to have been used for the larger denomination of copper coins under the Samanids.Footnote 75 Under the last Timurids (9th/15th century) in Khurāsān, two small silver coins were in circulation, in addition to the silver coin of basic value – kebekī (1.6 g) andʿadlī kebekī (0.8 g).Footnote 76 It is unlikely that the shiyānī-yi ʿadlī differed from the standard shiyānī. It must be taken into account that the symbol for currency in our corpus, which is two slashes (//), is the same in all the EJP summarizing notes of the legal documents, whether the coin is shiyānī (LD2, LD3, LD6) or shiyānī-yi ʿadlī (LD4a and LD4b).
3.2. Formulaic StructuresFootnote 77
3.2.1. Invocation
All the legal documents open with the basic basmala. No additional religious formulae are attested.
3.2.2. Opening formulae
The most common opening formula is the verb muqirr āmad/āmadh (“acknowledged”) which is the Persian equivalent of the Arabic verb aqarra. In one case (LD4a:2) the verb iqrār kardh[sic] is attested. In other cases, the conjugations of the verb guftan (“to say, to state”) figure along with the durative particle hamē, which is equivalent to the Arabic verb yaqūlu used in legal depositions, e.g., hamē gōyad (“he states”; LD4b:2, LD6:2).Footnote 78 The opening verb of LD3 (written همی گوایم ; LD3:2) may be read in two different ways: 1) hamē guwāyam (“I testify”); 2) hamē gōyam (“I state”). The latter suggestion is doubtful if one takes into account that the author of LD3 occasionally adds alif after wāw representing the long vowel -ō/-ū (e.g., بوا for bū in ll. 3, 5; گواسپند for gōspand in l. 6).
3.2.3. Identification of the muqirr
The muqirr is always identified by his ism (LD2:2, LD3:2, LD5:2, LD7:2, LD8:2) or by his kunya (LD1:2, LD4a:2, LD4b:2, LD6:2), along with his nasab (patronymic). Occasionally the place of residence or origin of the muqirr is stated on the recto (LD1:2, LD4a:2, LD7:2) or on the verso (LD5:2, LD7:2; perhaps also in LD6:2).
3.2.4. Confirmation of the legal capacity of the muqirr
The physical health (tan-durustī) and mental health (ʿaql) are noted according to the following formula or variants thereof: ba-tan-durustī wa-ba-ʿaql-i khwēsh (“in his own sound body and mind;” lit., “in his own health and reason/judgement”). This phrase is reminiscent of the Arabic phrase fi ṣiḥḥat ʿaqlihi wa-badanihi, which is an integral part of the confirmation of legal capacity in many legal acknowledgments written in Arabic.
The word tamām (“perfect”) occasionally appears instead of the reflexive marker khwēsh (LD5:2, LD8:2). LD3 adds the following: βē ʿillat-ē az ʿillε̄t(i)hā (“without any illness”).
The declaration concerning the fact that the muqirr acknowledged of his own free will and not by force is inconsistent. In two documents we find the following: ba-ṭawʿ (“of his own free will”, a rendering of Arabic ṭāʾiʿan; LD1:2) or rughbat (“of his own desire”, a rendering of Arabic rāghiban; LD6:2). In some cases, the fact that the muqirr was not coerced is stressed: βē makrūh-ē βē sitam-ē (“without any coercion or force”; LD2:3); βē hēch makrūh-ē (“without any coercion”; LD4a:3, LD4b:3); βē jawr-ē βē sitam-ē (“without any oppression or force”; LD7:2 and perhaps also LD8:2). One document includes a more detailed formula: βē jawr-ē sitab-ē ba-ṭawʿ-i khwash-manishī (“without any oppression or force, of (his own) free will (and) volition”; LD5:2).
3.2.5. Object of recognition (al-muqarr bihi)
This section is a subordinate clause in the subjective-style, which is introduced by the conjunction ki. In three cases, the phrase βar-ān sabīl ki is used (LD1:3, LD5:2-3, LD7:3). This phrase has already been attested in another legal document from the area of Bāmiyān – a marriage contract (470/1078) concerning the kābīn (“bridal gift”) that is given to the bride by the bridegroom.Footnote 79
The two formulations for the muqirr's declaration of the debt are:
(1) hast βar man (mar) … rā … shiyānī/ṭās gandum/ṭās jaw (“I owe [muqarr lahu] [amount of] shiyānī/bowls of wheat/bowls of barley”; LD1:3, LD3:2-3, LD4a:3-4, LD4b:3-4). This is apparently a translation of the Arabic formula for declaring the existence of a debt: ʿalā fulān li-fulān (“so-and-so owes so-and-so”).
(2) dād βāyad ma-rā mar … rā … shiyānī/ṭās gandum/ṭās jaw (“it is incumbent upon me to give [muqarr lahu] [amount of] shiyānī/bowls of wheat/bowls of barley”; LD2:3-4, LD5:3, LD6:3-4).Footnote 80
As said above, a short description of the shiyānī coin is provided in several documents. The quality of the produce is not stated. The half of the amount of the debt is always mentioned, except for two cases where it is not found (LD3, LD4b; in the latter case this may have been due to insufficient space). The formula for this statement is: ki nēma-yi ān bāshad … (“half of which being [number]”), except for LD7 which includes the following: ānch nēma bāshad … (“half of which being [number]”).
This is followed by a description of the debt: wām-ē lāzim ḥaqq-ē wājib (“an obligatory debt, a binding obligation”), being a rendering of the Arabic formula daynan lāziman ḥaqqan wājiban. In several instances, what was an adverbial phrase in Arabic clearly becomes an independent sentence in Persian with the copula ast (LD1:4-5, LD3:5, LD6:9). Based on this structure, the copula may be regarded as omitted in several cases (LD2, LD4a:5, LD4b:4, LD5:3-4). The phrase andar gardan-i man (lit., “upon my neck”) follows the word wa-ḥaqq-ē once (LD1:5). A similar phrase is attested in the marriage contract from Bāmiyān: har ḥaqq-ē ki ma-rā būd dar gardan-i shō-yi khwad Ilyās b. Shāh ham ba-dīn ḥiṣṣa-yi zamīn(i)hā … qaṭʿ kardam (“any right that was in my favor upon my husband, Ilyās b. Shāh – I have relinquished all (these rights) with this portion of lands …”).Footnote 81
LD7 is quite different from the rest of the acknowledgments, since it concerns a lease of three parcels of land by the muqirr for a period of three years, along with a loan of forty-two bowls of grain and one and a half kharwārs of straw (the verb used in the document is sitadam, i.e., “I took”). In exchange, the muqarr lahu will apparently receive a tripled amount of grain and straw after three years.
The process is described shortly by the muqirr's statement according to which he requested a certain place that belonged to Abū Naṣr b. Dāniyāl in the village of Rām K.Rī/K.Ray in exchange for grain for a period of three years (LD7:3-4).Footnote 82 This is followed by a short specification of the parcels of land (without stating their boundaries), the amount of cereal produce which was taken by the muqirr and the amount after three years, probably in order to return it to the muqarr lahu (LD7:5-7). The amount of straw is mentioned later, followed by the amount after three years (LD7:8-9).
3.2.6. Guarantee of repayment
The idea that the debtor must repay the debt is expressed by insisting on the irrevocability of the debt. The following formula is used to present this theme: wa-ma-rā az īn βāz gashtan nēst tā īn … ba-dōy taslīm nakunam (“I cannot revoke this (lit., “I have no return from this”) as long as I do not deliver to him this [muqarr bihi]”; LD2:7-8, LD3:6, LD4a:5-6, LD4b:5, LD5:4, LD6:10-11).Footnote 83
In the marriage contract, the irrevocability of the ownership transfer of the land from the bridegroom to the bride is expressed quite similarly: īn shahrnāz bint Ṣuʿlūk īn ḥiṣṣa-yi zamīn(i)hā … dar qabḍ-i khwad girift giriftan ki ān-rā bāz gashtan nabāshad Footnote 84 (“This Shahrnāz b. Ṣuʿlūk took this parcel of lands … into her own possession with an irrevocable taking (lit., ‘a taking which has no return’)”).
Document LD7 does not include this formula, but rather different declarations concerning the treatment of the land (ll. 7-8) and the repayment of goods (ll. 9-10).
3.2.7. Period of repayment
This element appears mostly before the date, but in some cases after it (LD2:10, LD3:7). The formula that indicates the time of repayment of the debt is the following: ḥāla-yi īn tā … māh-i paywasta (“this is to be transferred within [number] consecutive months”). The word ḥāla (written حاله, EJP form חאלה) may be regarded as the Arabic feminine-singular active participle ḥālla (“due”) from the Arabic verb ḥalla (“became due”, when referring to a debt).Footnote 85 The phrase dayn ḥāll (“a debt already due”) is a legal term, which is contrasted to dayn muʾajjal or dayn ʾilā ʾajal (“a debt which will be due in a future date”).Footnote 86 The masculine-singular active participle form ḥāll occasionally appears in acknowledgments of debt from the Cairo Genizah in the following manner, or variants thereof: daynan thābitan wa-ḥaqqan lāziman wājiban ḥāllan lahu ʿalayhi (“an established debt, a binding right with legal force, which he owes him”.)Footnote 87
However, the choice of ḥālla over other terms, such as ḥulūl (the maṣdar of the verb ḥalla) or maḥall (“due date”), seems quite strange. Considering the context, ḥāla could be a form which resulted from omitting the initial alif of iḥāla, i.e., “transfer”.Footnote 88
Although the section concerning the period of repayment does not appear in LD7, the phrase ba-muddat-i sih sāl (“for a period of three years”) is repeated several times, indicating that the repayment must be at the end of that period.
3.2.8. Evidence
LD2 has a formula before the date which states that the document serves as a proof, most likely for the muqarr lahu: wa-īn khaṭṭ mar ō-rā ḥujjat (“This document serves as evidence for him (lit., “is an evidence for him’)”; LD2:8). This element is not found in the other acknowledgment deeds discussed here. However, it does exist in two acknowledgment deeds purchased by the NLI in 2016. The earlier of the two is dated to the year 401/1011 and includes the phrase īn khaṭṭ ōy-rā ḥujjat (“this document serves as evidence for him (lit., ‘is an evidence for him’)”; Ms. Heb. 8333.216 = 4, 1r:5). The second document dated to the year 409/1018 contains the phrase wa-īn khaṭṭ bidādam tā ḥujjat bāshad (“and I gave this document so that it would be evidence”; Ms. Heb. 8333.217 = 4, 1r: 6).
A more elaborate formula exists in the marriage contract from Bāmiyān as well: … tā dast-i way ḥujjat bāshad ba-guwāyī-yi kas(i)hā-yē ki nām(i)hā-yi khwad ba-ākhir-i īn khaṭṭ mussamā kardand (“(This document was written) … so that it would be evidence in her hands by the testimony of those who stated their names at the foot of this document”).Footnote 89
3.2.9. Date
A dating formula in Persian appears in five documents (LD1:6, LD2:8-10, LD3:7, LD5:5, LD6:12-13). It starts with wa-īn khaṭṭ nibishta āmad … (“this document was written …”), except for LD1, where the dating formula is formulated in the first person singular: wa-īn khaṭṭ nibishtam … (“I wrote this document …”). The word sana, followed by the years in words in Arabic, appears in three documents (LD1:6, LD5:5, LD6:13), whereas the word sāl is used twice (LD2:10, LD3:7), followed by the preposition βar and the year in Persian.Footnote 90
As LD2 and LD5, the marriage contract has the following date: wa-īn khaṭṭ nibishta āmad hafdah rōz gudhashta az māh-i Dhū al-Qaʿda sanata sabʿīn wa-arbaʿ miʾa (“This document was written on the 17th day of the month of Dhū al-Qaʿda in the year 470”).Footnote 91
In three documents (LD4a:6-7, LD4b:5-6, LD7:10-11), the date formula is written in Arabic and starts either with wa-dhālika f ī … (“this (was written) in [date]”; LD4a:6, LD4b:5) or wa-kutiba f ī … (“It was written in [date]”; LD7:10).
In four documents (LD2:9, LD4a:6, LD4b:6, LD5:5), the day is specified in addition to the month and year.
3.2.10. Witness clauses
Islamic law requires a minimum of two witnesses in order to validate a contract. The number of witnesses in the acknowledgment documents exceeds the minimum and ranges from three to ten. There is no correlation between the number of witnesses and the amount of the debt. For example, seven witnesses testified to an acknowledgment of a debt of 55 shiyānī (LD1), whereas only five witnesses testified to an acknowledgment of a debt of 115 shiyānī, 72 bowls of barley and 60 bowls of wheat (LD6).
The autograph testimonies are written in Arabic on the lower part of the document. The witnesses declare in the testimonies that they testified to the acknowledgment by the muqirr. Most of the testimonies are very short and go by the following formula: shahida … ʿalā iqrār … wa-kataba bi-khaṭṭihi (“[witness] was a witness to the acknowledgment by [muqirr] and he wrote (it) in his handwriting”), if the witness writes the testimony himself. If it is written for him, the formula will be shahida … ʿalā iqrār … wa-kutiba bi-ʾamrihi (“[witness] was a witness to the acknowledgment by [muqirr] and it was written according to his order”). Occasionally, other phrases are added, such as bi-jamīʿ mā f īhi (“with all that is in it”; LD3, nos. 2, 6, 8), bi-mā f īhi (“to that which is in it”; LD5, no. 2, LD7, no.3) or bi-dhālika (“herein”; LD1, no. 6, LD3, nos. 6, 8). The witness clauses in the marriage contract are written in the same manner.Footnote 92
One witness in LD3 specifies in Arabic the contents of the debt in his testimony. The writing of such a specified testimony in Arabic may imply the existence of Arabic speakers in this region, or at least of Persian speakers who were well versed in Arabic.
3.3. Relation to Acknowledgment Deeds Written in Arabic
Previous studies have stressed the predominance of Arabic in the legal field in the Iranian world during the first centuries of Islam. This predominance was reflected, among other things, by drawing up legal documents in Arabic. According to Gronke, the adoption of Arabic as a legal language in the Iranian world was part of the general adoption of the Islamic legal system. Only in the second half of the 8th/14th century did a gradual change begin, which resulted in Persian becoming the only legal language by the beginning of the Safavid period (early 10th/16th century).Footnote 93
Focusing on the area of eastern Khurāsān, we have evidence that Arabic was used for drawing up tax receipts and legal documents during the 2nd/8th century, thanks to a group of documents in Arabic that was apparently part of the archive of a family from northeastern Khurāsān in the early Abbasid period.Footnote 94 The use of Arabic involved also the introduction of new formulaic traditions in the administrative and legal fields. This can be inferred from the difference in formulaic structure between the Arabic documents and three extant contemporary Bactrian documents, which contain personal and place names that appear in the Arabic documents as well.Footnote 95 In other words, the documents in Arabic were not imitations of the local formulaic traditions reflected in the Bactrian documents.Footnote 96
The existence of the acknowledgment deeds of the NLI collection, as well as the marriage contract mentioned above, shows that during the 5th/11th century, legal documents were written in New Persian in the area of Bāmiyān. This does not necessarily imply, however, that Arabic was not employed as a legal language in the areas where we have evidence of legal writing in Persian. Given the small number of known legal documents from Persian-speaking areas, it is impossible to determine the ratio of Arabic to Persian in such documents.
Although written in Persian, the influence of the Arabic language and of legal documents written in Arabic on the NLI acknowledgment deeds is quite considerable. In general, it is evident that the authors of the extant Islamic legal documents written in New Persian during the first centuries of Islam borrowed and relied on Arabic formulae. Thus, Gronke shows that the documents written in Persian from the Ardabīl corpus may include date formulae and witness clauses in Arabic. Moreover, in several cases the Persian documents from Ardabīl reflect translations of legal terms and phrases from Arabic.Footnote 97
As in the Ardabīl corpus, the acknowledgments from the NLI collection contain date formulae and witness clauses in Arabic. Other phrases and formulae are clearly renderings from Arabic. As mentioned above, the Arabic phrase ʿalā … li-… (“[muqirr] owes [muqarr lahu]”) is rendered hast βar ma-rā mar … rā (“I owe [muqarr lahu]”) or the phrase wām-ē lāzim ḥaqq-ē wājib (“an obligatory debt, a binding obligation”) is rendered from daynan lāziman ḥaqqan wājiban.
The reliance on Arabic also affected the syntactical structure of several formulae in the NLI acknowledgment deeds. This is clearly demonstrated, for example, by the fact that the first sentence in each of them starts with a verb (muqirr amād, hamē gōyad, iqrār kard), which is typical of Arabic syntactical structure. Furthermore, the order of the formulaic elements of the NLI acknowledgments and of those written in Arabic is very similar.Footnote 98
However, the elements seen in the NLI acknowledgments are usually shorter than those found in their Arabic counterparts. A good example would be the formula expressing the guarantee of repayment in Arabic documents from Egypt dated to the 5th-6th/11th-12th centuries. Thus, the acknowledgments from Upper Egypt contain an elaborate formula that prevents the debtor from avoiding the repayment of the debt and runs as follows: bi-ghayr mudāfaʿa wa-lā mumānaʿa wa-lā iḥtijāj bi-ḥujja dūna al-khurūj min al-mablagh al-madhkūr ʿalā tamāmihi wa-kamālihi (“without any delay, or pretext or refusal, or by bringing forward any argument beyond the paying of the aforementioned amount completely and fully”.)Footnote 99 Some of the acknowledgments from Fusṭāṭ contain a similar clause,Footnote 100 whereas others comprise a clause that starts with a verbal form, for example: lā yudāfiʿuhu bihā wa-lā bi-shayʾ minhā wa-lā yaḥtajj ʿalayhi bi-ḥujja … (“he will not postpone payment of it to him, or any part of it, nor argue against him with an argument”.)Footnote 101 Furthermore, in three documents, a clause regarding the solvency of the muqirr is added: wa-aqarra … annahu malīʾ bi-l-dayn al-madhkūr fīhi bi-milʾihi wa-huwa … (“[muqirr] acknowledged that he was solvent to the amount of the aforementioned debt, which is [amount]”.)Footnote 102 A solvency clause is also mentioned in the shurūṭ section of a legal compendium of Ḥanafi law titled al-Muḥīṭ al-burhānī fī al-fiqh al-nuʿmānī by the Ḥanaf ī jurist Burhān al-Dīn Maḥmūd b. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Māza (d. 570/1174 or 616/1219): wa-qad aqarra hādhā al-muqirr annahu malīʾ mūsir qādir ʿalā qaḍāʾ hādhā al-dayn mālik min al-aʿyān ma yaf ī bihi wa-yazīd ʿalayhi Footnote 103 (“and this muqirr acknowledged that he is solvent, wealthy, capable of paying this debt and in possession of the ready money which covers and exceeds it”.) These examples contrast with the very short and general statement regarding the irrevocability of the acknowledgment and the duty of repayment that appears in the NLI acknowledgments: wa-ma-rā az īn βāz gashtan nēst tā īn … ba-dōy taslīm nakunam (“I cannot revoke this (lit., ‘I have no return from this’) as long as I do not deliver to him this [muqarr bihi]”.)
The formula expressing the guarantee of repayment may also be used to demonstrate that not all formulaic elements have equivalents in the extant and available Arabic acknowledgments. The most similar formula I was able to find was that from al-Muḥīṭ al-burhānī: lā barāʾa lahu minhā illā bi-khurūjihā minhu ilayhi Footnote 104 (“he is not acquitted from (paying) them (i.e., the dirhams or dīnārs), except by paying them to him”). The first part of the formula wa-ma-rā az ān βāz gashtan nēst resembles a clause found in a legal document from al-Fayyūm concerning a charitable grant: lā rajʿa li-Tūsāna ibnat Bisant fī hādhā al-ṣadaqa wa-lā mathnawiyya (“Tūsānah, daughter of Bisanti, can neither revoke this charitable grant nor make any condition or reservation”).Footnote 105 A similar formula exists in the above-mentioned waqf document from al-Fatāwā al-Hindiyya: lā rajʿa li-hādhā al-mutaṣaddiq fī shayʾ minha (“This giver of the ṣadaqa cannot revoke anything from it (i.e., the ṣadaqa)”.)Footnote 106 Furthermore, the term rujūʿ is attested in an acknowledgment deed drawn up in Persian in the area of Bāmiyān in the year 577/1181, where we find the phrase way-rā rujūʿ nīst illā biguzārad īn ḥaqq ba-tamāmī (Ms. Heb. 8333.63 = 4, 1r:5-6; “he has no return, except by paying this debt entirely”.)
It is also noteworthy that the NLI acknowledgments lack several components occasionally appearing in Arabic acknowledgments, such as acceptance of the acknowledgment by the muqarr lahu Footnote 107 or reference in the body of the text to the presence of witnesses.Footnote 108
4. Conclusions
The extant Islamic legal documents written in New Persian from the first centuries of Islam up to the Mongol invasion amount to several dozens, a significant portion of which originate in the area of Bāmiyān. From among these documents, the group of the NLI acknowledgment deeds dated to the 5th/11th century may be the earliest extant Islamic legal documents in New Persian.
Whereas during the 2nd/8th century, there is evidence of writing legal documents in Bactrian and in Arabic in the area of Bāmiyān, the NLI acknowledgment deeds and the marriage contract from Bāmiyān show that during the 5th/11th century, legal documents from this region were written in New Persian. This does not imply, however, that Arabic was no longer used for writing legal documents. It is plausible to assume that since it came to the region during the 2nd/8th century, Arabic continued to be the primary language of the courts and the notaries, while writing in Persian was gradually developing and entering the field of legal writing.Footnote 109
Although written in Persian, the NLI acknowledgments share elements with extant contemporary Arabic acknowledgments. Some elements, such as the witness clauses and occasionally the date, are written in Arabic, whereas others are direct translations from Arabic. I was unable, however, to find equivalents for all the elements in extant acknowledgments written in Arabic. Based on the documents we possess, it may be assumed that some of the formulae are rendered from Arabic, whereas others are paraphrases of similar meaning. Another possibility is that the formulae with no equivalents in Arabic were based on certain Arabic legal texts that have not come down to us.
The use of short formulae and the absence of certain formulae in the NLI legal documents, as well as the adherence to the formulaic and syntactic structure of Arabic legal documents, may also reflect an early stage of legal writing in Persian. This type of writing might have been taking its first steps in the late 4th/10th and early 5th/11th centuries in the area of Bāmiyān, perhaps even in the whole region of eastern Khurāsān. The Persian legal vocabulary was rather limited and did not facilitate the development of elaborate legal formulae. The succinct style encountered in these legal documents is reminiscent of ENP prose during this period, which “was still purely utilitarian and had no aesthetic pretensions”.Footnote 110
