FEW EVENTS of internal Jewish history during the Middle Ages more effectively exemplify diversity and conflict than the so-called ‘Maimonidean conflicts’, the attempts by certain Jews to control the educational curriculum and public discourse of their communities by banning various philosophical texts and those who taught or studied them. One of the bestknown of these episodes, the ban restricting the study of Greek philosophy, promulgated during the summer of 1305 by Solomon ben Adret (Rashba) and his colleagues in Barcelona, has been extensively treated by historians for over a century. The bitter conflict surrounding this ban is extensively documented in Minḥat kena’ot (A Zealous Offering), a collection of letters edited by Abba Mari of Lunel, one of the protagonists of that conflict and an ally of Ben Adret. Yet there is still no consensus among scholars about the proper interpretation of this dramatic episode, and sharp disagreement remains over what was fuelling the antagonism. What follows is a suggestion of a new framework in which to evaluate the events of 1305.

The point of departure is an issue of dispute frequently mentioned but not thoroughly analysed in the secondary literature: the independence of the Jewish communities in southern France from the hegemony of Barcelona. The legal background of this question as an internal Jewish problem can be seen in the responsa of Ben Adret. Questions addressed to him from cities such as Perpignan, Montpellier, Narbonne, Carcassonne, Marseilles, and Avignon indicate that he was considered to be the outstanding halakhic authority of his time throughout southern France. However, his responsa reveal a clear recognition of the principle of local self-determination and the importance of local custom in deciding the law.

The general rule is that the community may not impose its will on another, the only exceptions being a ban issued by a nasi or an exilarch or an emergency gezerah (decree) of one community that the majority of the second community are capable of obeying. When a political boundary divides the two communities, the jurisdiction of one over the other is even more strictly curtailed.