² The exact place of discovery of the corpus is unknown. For a general overview of the corpus from which the NLI collection originates, see Shaked, Sh., “Early Persian Documents from Khorasan”, Journal of Persianate Studies, 6 (2013), pp. 153-162CrossRefGoogle Scholar. High-quality images of the entire NLI collection are available in the library's online catalog (Shelfmarks: Jerusalem, National Library of Israel, Ms. Heb. 8333.1=4 to Ms. Heb. 8333.223=4).

³ See Haim, O., “Documents from Afghanistan in the National Library of Israel”, Ginzei Qedem, 10 (2014), pp. 9–28Google Scholar (in Hebrew). For a preliminary edition and translation of most of these items, see idem, Legal Documents and Personal Letters in Early Judaeo-Persian and Early New Persian from Islamic Khurāsān (5th/11th cent.) (unpublished MA Thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2014).

⁴ For a short overview of the documents purchased in 2016, see Haim, O., “Further Documents from Afghanistan in the National Library of Israel”, AB″A (Journal for the Research and Study of the Jews of Iran, Bukhara and Afghanistan), 10 (2017), pp. 6-21 (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁵ In this paper, the term “(Islamic) legal document” refers to any type of document that corresponds to the types mentioned in the shurūṭ literature (e.g., iqrār, mubāyaʿa etc.) and requires the presence of witnesses.

⁶ E.g., in an acknowledgment deed dated to 577/1181, a man named Muḥammad b. Aḥmad from the “great village of Kāwshān” acknowledges that he must pay a debt of 630 mann of grain in the city of Bāmiyān within 10 days (Ms. Heb. 8333.64=4, 1r:9-10). For suggestions regarding the location of Kāwshān, see O. Haim, “What is the ‘Afghan Genizah’? A Short Guide to the Collection of the Afghan Manuscripts in the National Library of Israel, with the Edition of Two Documents”, Afghanistan, 2 (forthcoming).

⁷ The following abbreviations are used for the eight legal documents: LD1 = Ms. Heb. 8333.20=4; LD2 = Ms. Heb. 8333.17=4; LD3 = Ms. Heb. 8333.21=4; LD4a, LD4b = Ms. Heb. 8333.12=4; LD5 = Ms. Heb. 8333.25=4; LD6 = Ms. Heb. 8333.19=4; LD7 = Ms. Heb. 8333.15=4; LD8 = Ms. Heb. 8333.11=4. Three additional acknowledgments from the same archive were purchased in 2016 (Ms. Heb. 8333.215=4, Ms. Heb. 8333.216=4, and Ms. Heb. 8333.217=4). For an edition and translation of documents Ms. Heb. 8333.217=4 and Ms. Heb. 8333.216=4, see Haim, “What is the ‘Afghan Genizah’?” Document Ms. Heb. 8333.215=4 is currently being prepared for publication.

⁸ C. Müller, ‘Acknowledgement’, EI ³.

⁹ As it appears from the documents, Abū Naṣr b. Daniel had two personal names – Yehuda and Aḥmad. In a letter written in EJP and sent to Abū Naṣr b. Daniel, the addressee, whose name is written in Perso-Arabic script on the verso, is Abū Naṣr Aḥmad b. Dāniyāl. See Haim, Legal Documents, pp. 104-108.

¹⁰ Besides the following list, there are several more Persian legal documents dated to the 7^th/13^th century in the al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf collection in Jerusalem, which I was unable to consult. For more information, see Little, D. P., A Catalogue of the Islamic Documents from al-Ḥaram ash-Sharīf in Jerusalem (Beirut, 1984), pp. 377-387Google Scholar.

¹¹ For an edition and translation, see Scarcia, G., “A Preliminary Report on a Persian Legal Document of 470-1078 found at Bāmiyān”, East and West, 14/1-2 (1963), pp. 73-85Google Scholar; idem, “An Edition of the Persian Legal Document from Bāmiyān”, East and West, 16/3-4 (1966), pp. 290-295Google Scholar. The document was also published by Gh. S. Humāyūn, who disagrees with many of Scarcia's postulations and reading suggestions; see Humāyūn, Gh. S., “Kābīn-nāma”, Āryānā, 256 (1343/1965), pp. 1-13Google Scholar; idem, “Takmila bar maqāla-yi kābīn-nāma”, Āryānā, 258 (1344/1965), pp. 215-220Google Scholar.

¹² For an edition and translation, see Margoliouth, D. S., “Early Documents in the Persian Language. I. Persian Deed for the Sale of Land, discovered by Dr Hoernlé”, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 35/4 (1903), pp. 761-770CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This document was later published by M. Mīnuvī; see Mīnuvī, M., “Qabāla-yi fārsī az qarn-i shishum”, Farhang-i Irān zamīn, 14 (1345-6/1966), pp. 287-288Google Scholar.

¹³ For an edition and translation, see Gronke, M., Arabische und persische Privaturkunden des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts aus Ardabil (Berlin, 1982): docs. I (517/1123), IV (582/1186), VI (602/1205), VII (603/1207)Google Scholar.

¹⁴ These documents are part of the above-mentioned second group of the NLI collection and have not been properly studied as yet. Some of the documents were drawn up after the Mongols’ arrival in Bāmiyān in the year 618/1221. The following is a partial list of the documents: Ms. Heb. 8333.156=4 (549/1154), Ms. Heb. 8333.65=4 (563/1168), Ms. Heb. 8333.69=4 (563/1168), Ms. Heb. 8333.63=4 (577/1181), Ms. Heb. 8333.64=4 (577/1181), Ms. Heb. 8333.68=4 (609/1213), Ms. Heb. 8333.62=4 (617 /1220), Ms. Heb. 8333.67=4 (618/1221), Ms. Heb. 8333.70=4 (623/1226).

¹⁵ For an edition and translation, see Imād al-Dīn Shaykh al-Ḥukamāʾī, “Du sanad az nāḥiya-yi Balkh dar sadahā-yi shisum wa-haftum-i hijrī”, Guzārish-i mīrāth, 31-32 (1388/2009), pp. 23-26Google Scholar. I thank Hossein Sheikh for drawing my attention to this study.

¹⁶ For other examples of interchangeability between the intervocalic fāʾ and bāʾ or wāw, see Lazard, G., La langue des plus anciens monuments de la prose persane (Paris, 1963), §1–4Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Following Lazard (Lazard, La langue, pp. 3-4), I use of the majhūl vowels (ē, ō) in phonetic transcription of Early New Persian.

¹⁸ Following Ludwig Paul's analysis that relies on the possible realisation of β (or v) by the bet in EJP. See Paul, L., A Grammar of Early Judaeo-Persian (Wiesbaden, 2013), §18(a)Google Scholar.

¹⁹ For a discussion regarding the letter ڤ, see Lazard, La langue.

²⁰ See Lazard, La langue, §23. In several documents from this corpus, however, the letter dhāl does appear in such positions, e.g., ببایذ داذن (bi-bāyadh dādhan; Ms. Heb. 8333.5=4, 1r:7) and داذ فایذ (dādh βāyadh; Ms. Heb. 8333.28=4, 1r:6).

²¹ The same form is attested in a commercial letter from this corpus. See Ms. Heb. 8333.18=4, 1r:5.

²² See also Ms. Heb. 8333.18=4, Ms. Heb. 8333.28=4, Ms. Heb. 8333.22=4.

²³ E.g., بوا for Bū (LD3:3, 5, witness clause no. 10); گواسـ[ـپـ]ـند for gōspand (LD3:6); and perhaps also گوایم for gōyam (LD3:2). The reading of some of these words is not certain. See the Text section below.

²⁴ Lit., “upon my neck”.

²⁵ For further details on this toponym, see Adamec, L. W., Historical and Political Gazetteer of Afghanistan (Graz, 1972-1985), vi, pp. 109-110Google Scholar. For anthropological research on a dispute that broke out between two groups in the Birgilīch area in the 1960s, see Cantfield, R. L., “Trouble in Birgilich”, in Everyday Life in Central Asia: Past and Present, (eds.) Sahadeo, J. and Zanca, R. (Bloomington, 2007), pp. 58-65Google Scholar. According to the GEOnet Names Server (henceforth GNS) of the US National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (available at http://earth-info.nga.mil/gns/html/index.html), Birgilīch is a locality situated at the following coordinates: lat. 34°55′15″N, long. 68°11′05″E.

²⁶ For a preliminary edition and translation of this text, see Haim, Legal Documents, pp. 112-114.

²⁷ Sims-Williams, N., Iranisches Personennamenbuch, Band II: Mitteliranische Personennamen, Faszikel 7: Bactrian Personal Names (Vienna, 2010), p. 119Google Scholar. For a short discussion of the ending -γολο, see also Sims-Williams, N. and Vaissière, È. de la, “A Bactrian Document from Southern Afghanistan?”, Bulletin of the Asia Institute, 25 (2011), p. 51Google Scholar.

²⁸ Lit., ‘shepherd’.

²⁹ See, e.g., Khan, G., Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents in the Cambridge Genizah Collection (Cambridge, 1993), p. 204Google Scholar.

³⁰ See Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, p. 13.

³¹ See, e.g., Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, p. 207.

³² Lit., “the learned, the townsman”.

³³ For the imāla in EJP texts, see Paul, A Grammar, §38. Following Paul, I transcribe the imāla vowel as [ε̄].

³⁴ GNS provides the following coordinates: بالیچ – 35°50′41″'N, long. 64°42'36''E; بلیچ – 35°57′27″N, long. 64°38′16″E.

³⁵ For this governor's name in its multiple forms on coins issued during the time of Nūḥ b. Naṣr (331-343/943-954), Manṣūr b. Nūḥ (350-366/961-976) and Nūḥ b. Manṣūr (366-387/976-997), see Schwarz, F., Sylloge Numorum Arabicorum Tübingen: Balḫ und die Landschaften am Oberen Oxus – XIVc Ḫurāsān III (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 38-58Google Scholar.

³⁶ MacKenzie, D. N., A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary (London, 1986), p. 77Google Scholar, s.v. “Stambag”; Durkin-Meisterernst, D., Dictionary of Manichaean Texts, vol. 3, pt. 1: Dictionary of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian (Turnhout, 2004), p. 90Google Scholar, s.v. “ʿstmbg”, “ʿstmbgyh”.

³⁷ See Ā. Ādharnūsh, Tārikh-i tarjuma az ʿarabī ba-fārsī (Tehran, 1375/1996-97), p. 160.

³⁸ Dihkhuda, ʿAlī Akbar, Lughat-nāma (Tehran, 1373/1994), xiii, p. 19,240Google Scholar, s.v. “Mawrī”: marwī dar talaffuẓ-i mardum-i khurāsān.

³⁹ Personal communication.

⁴⁰ For another instance in which gimel was written instead of the expected kaf, see Ms. Heb. 8333.4=4, 1r:8, where the word ניזדיג (NP nazdīk) was originally written, but later changed to ניזדיך. For a preliminary edition of the text, see Haim, Legal Documents, pp. 104-108. In this context, see also Lazard, La langue, §48(a).

⁴¹ See Adamec, Historical and political gazetteer, vi, p. 476: “A village located on a tributary of the Ghorband, some 4 miles southwest of Shibar in Parwan province.” GNS gives the following coordinates for this village: lat. 34°56′25″N, long. 68°11′31″E.

⁴² Lit., ‘ass-load’.

⁴³ For another instance in which gimel was written instead of the expected kaf, see no. 40 above.

⁴⁴ According to GNS, Bahārak is a district in Badakhshān province (lat. 37°02′15″N, long. 70°54′00″E); Pūlar is a name of two settlements in Badakhshān (lat. 36°48′00″N, long. 70°59′19″E and lat. 37°09′27″N, long. 70°44′23″E).

⁴⁵ For more on the varying values of kharwār, see Hinz, W., Islamische Masse und Gewichte (Leiden, 1970), pp. 14-15Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Although Maḥmūd and Masʿūd are referred to as sulṭān in historical sources composed during the Ghaznawid period, the official adoption of the title by the Ghaznawids apparently occurred later than 430/1039. The earliest coin known carrying the title al-sulṭān al-muʿaẓẓam is one of Farrukhzād (r. 444-451/1053-1059). See Bosworth, C.E., “The Titulature of the Early Ghaznavids”, Oriens, 15 (1962), pp. 222-224CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ That the taxes were also paid in kind in the area of Nīshāpūr was shown by Bosworth: “The taxes collected in kind comprised the obvious cereal and vegetable crops and domestic beasts, but the sources also mention such products as cotton, oak-galls, pomegranate husks, eggs and straw being taken” (Bosworth, C.E., The Ghaznawids: Their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran, 994-1040 (Beirut, 1973), p. 82Google Scholar).

⁴⁸ Personal communication.

⁴⁹ Dihkhudā, Lughat-nāma, xiv, p. 20,493, s.v. “Waznī”.

⁵⁰ For mawzūn, see, e.g., Gronke, Arabische und persische Privaturkunden, pp. 31-32 and doc. XX, which refers to copper coins (al-fulūs al-mawzūna). For wāzin in the acknowledgments from Fatimid Fusṭāṭ, see Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, p. 205.

⁵¹ See Haim, O., “An Early Judeo-Persian Letter sent from Ghazna to Bāmiyān (Ms. Heb. 8333.29=4)”, Bulletin of the Asia Institute, 26 (2016), pp. 114-115Google Scholar.

⁵² For the dating, see Abū Najm Aḥmad b. Qawṣ Manuchihrī, Diwān-i Manuchihrī-yi Dāmghānī, (ed.) Dabīr-Siyāqī, Muḥammad (Tehran, 1347/1968), p. 252Google Scholar.

⁵³ Manuchihrī, Diwān, p. 81: shāʿirān-rā dar Ray-u-Gurgān-u-dar Shirwān ki dīd / badra-yi ʿadlī ba-pusht-i pīl āwarda ba-zīn (“When he sees the poets in Ray, Gurgān and Shirwān / he loads a badra of ʿadlī (coins) on the back of an elephant”). The term badra can be translated as “a sum of 10,000 dirhams” or simply as “purse”. See Dihkhudā, Lughat-nāma, iii, p. 3,855, s.v. “Badra²”.

⁵⁴ Manuchihrī, Diwān, pp. 253-254.

⁵⁵ Apud Manuchihrī, Diwān, pp. 253-254. For the original text, see Abū al-Faḍl Muḥammad b. Ḥusayn Bayhaqī, Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī, (ed.) Fayyaḍ, ʿAlī Akbar (Mashhad, 1373/2005), p. 279Google Scholar (translated by Bosworth, C.E., The History of Beyhaqi: The History of Sultan Masʿud of Ghazna, 1030-1041 [Boston, 2011], i, p. 383Google Scholar).

⁵⁶ See Abū al-Qāsim Ḥasan b. Aḥmad ʿUnṣurī, Dīwān-i ustād ʿUnṣurī-yi Balkhī, (ed.) Dabīr-Siyāqī, Muḥammad (Tehran, 1342/1963), p. 241Google Scholar: chu majlis-i malik al-sharq az nithār-i mulūk / ba-jaʿfarī u-ba-ʿadlī nihufta shādurwān (“Like the assembly of the king of the East, from the money scattered by the kings / jaʿfarī and ʿadlī covered the carpet”).

⁵⁷ See Dihkhudā, Lughat-nāma, v, p. 6,833, s.v. “Jaʿfarī”.

⁵⁸ Davidovich, E. A. and Dani, A. H., “Coinage and the Monetary System”, in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, vol. 4: The Age of Achievements, part 1: The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, (eds.) Asimov, M. S. and Bosworth, C. E. (Paris, 1998), p. 399Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Album, S., A Checklist of Islamic Coins (Santa Rosa, 1998), p. 6Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ On this work, see M. Khalfaoui, “Al-Fatāwā al-ʿĀlamgīriyya”, EI ³.

⁶¹ Davidovich and Dani, “Coinage”, p. 401.

⁶² Khadr, M., “Deux actes de waqf d'un Qarahanide d'Asie Centrale, avec une introduction par Cl. Cahen”, Journal Asiatique, 255 (1967), p. 324Google Scholar.

⁶³ See Khadr, “Deux actes”, p. 327. On the dirhams that were struck with the name and title of Ibrāhīm Ṭamghāj Khān and known as muʾayyadī, see Davidovich, E. A., “The Karakhanids”, in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, vol. 4: The Age of Achievements, part 1: The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, (eds.) Asimov, M. S. and Bosworth, C.E. (Paris, 1998), p. 129Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Album, Checklist, p. 75, s.v. nos. 3301 (Naṣr b. ʿAlī), 3322 (Muḥammad b. Naṣr), 3326 (Ibrāhīm b. Naṣr); Schwarz, Sylloge, pp. 88 (Naṣr b. ʿAlī), 140 (Naṣr b. ʿAlī), 142 (Muḥammad b. Naṣr).

⁶⁵ The title al-amīr al-ʿādil (al-amīr al-ʿadl) was one of the titles of ʿAḍud al-Dawla (d. 372/983). The title al-malik al-ʿādil (al-malik al-ʿadl) also occurs on coins issued by ʿAḍud al-Dawla, as well as on coins by Ṣamṣām al-Dawla (d. 388/998), Bahāʾ al-Dawla (d. 403/1012), Qawām al-Dawla (d. 419/1028), Sulṭān al-Dawla (d. 415/1024), Shams al-Dawla (d. 412/1021-22) and Sharaf al-Dawla (d. 379/989). For an index of the titles used by the Buyids on their coins, see Treadwell, L., Buyid Coinage: A Die Corpus, 322-445 A.H. (Oxford, 2011), pp. xxix-xxxviiGoogle Scholar. For a discussion of the title al-amīr al-ʿadl, see Richter-Bernburg, L., “Amīr-Malik-Shāhānshāh: ʿAḍud ad-Dawla's Titulature Re-Examined”, Iran, 18 (1980), p. 88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁶ Treadwell, Buyid Coinage, p. xii.

⁶⁷ Apud Richter-Bernburg, “Amīr-Malik-Shāhānshāh”, p. 99, no. 74. For the original text, see ʿAbd al-Qādir b. ʿUmar al-Baghdādī, Khizānat al-adab wa-lubb lubāb lisān al-ʿarab, (ed.) Hārūn, ʿAbd al-Salām Muḥammad (Cairo, 1418/1997), ii, p. 360Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ See Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, (eds.) Qumayḥa, Mufīd et al. (Cairo: 1424/2004), xxvi, p. 136Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Apud Richter-Bernburg “Amīr-Malik-Shāhānshāh”, p. 99, no. 74. For the original text, see Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Maqdisī, Aḥsan al-taqāsīm wa-maʿrifat al-aqālīm, (ed.) de Goeje, M. J. (Leiden, 1906), p. 471, note iGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁰ It does not appear in Bosworth's article concerning the titulature of the early Ghaznawids; see Bosworth, “The Titulature”.

⁷¹ Blair, S., The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden, 1992), p. 117, no. 5Google Scholar.

⁷² Bosworth, “The Titulature”, p. 216.

⁷³ Bosworth remarks that at the time of the early Ghaznawids it was quite common for the word ʿadl to appear on coins; see Bosworth, “The Titulature”, p. 224. See in this context the remark by Kolbas that “the words ʿadl or ʿādil without the definite article, meaning ‘justice’ or ‘equanimity’, had appeared on Islamic coinage since the second century hijra as verification that money was a form of natural justice. Often the word stood alone above the field without any connection to a person” (Kolbas, J. G., The Mongols in Iran: Chingiz Khan to Uljaytu, 1220–1309 (New York, 2005), p. 55Google Scholar). For Samanid and Ghaznawid coins with the word ʿadl, see Mitchiner, M., The Multiple Dirhems of Medieval Afghanistan (London, 1973), p. 51Google Scholar; Schwarz, Sylloge, pp. 38–58 (Samanids); pp. 36, 88–92, 122, 146, 148, 162–164 (Ghaznawids).

⁷⁴ Album, Checklist, p. 6.

⁷⁵ Davidovich and Dani, “Coinage”, p. 399.

⁷⁶ Ibid., p. 409.

⁷⁷ I follow the structure proposed by Professor Geoffrey Khan in his study of the acknowledgments from the Cairo Genizah (Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, pp. 203-207). The following analysis is indebted to Khan's study of these acknowledgments, as well as to that of documents of sale, which appears in the same book (see Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, pp. 7-55). Although LD7 has a structure somewhat different to the other documents, I have included it in this analysis, mentioning differences in sections v, vi and vii.

⁷⁸ Arabic documents starting with the verb yaqūlu are usually considered “statements” or “declarations”. Little assumes that the yaqūl-depositions in the Ḥaram al-Sharīf collection “did not carry the same legal weight as iqrārāt and ishhādāt” (Little, Catalogue, pp. 245-246). As for the declarations from the Cairo Genizah, for example, one can easily notice the many differences between the declarations of receipt of money (see Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, docs. 54, 55) and the acknowledgments of receipt of money (see ibid., docs. 36, 40, 43). However, documents LD4b, LD6 and perhaps LD3, which start with the verb guftan, differ from the others only in the opening verb. I have therefore decided to consider them as acknowledgments.

⁷⁹ Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, p. 7; Scarcia, “An edition”, p. 292, no. 5.

⁸⁰ The infinitive form, either full or shortened, usually follows the modal verb. However, it may precede the modal verb, as in this case; see Lazard, La langue, §502.

⁸¹ Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, p. 13.

⁸² For a discussion of the toponym, see the commentary section of LD7.

⁸³ Although the verb bikunam may be appropriate in this context, the diacritical dot over the first letter in LD2, LD5 and LD6 leaves us no room for doubt that it is nakunam.

⁸⁴ Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, pp. 12-13.

⁸⁵ The use of the feminine form is attested in an acknowledgment of a debt datable to the 2^nd/8^th century from Egypt. Grohmann reads and translates: ʿashara darāhim [… ji]yād ḥalla lahu ʿalayhi …, “ten dirhams […… good] pieces, which will fall due to his … credit, (and are) to his … debit, ……” (Grohmann, A., Arabic Papyri in the Egyptian Library (Cairo, 1934-1938), vol. 2, doc. 99:5Google Scholar). The feminine form ḥālla was used since it described the plural form darāhim.

⁸⁶ Schacht, J., An Introduction to Islamic Law (Oxford, 1964), p. 145Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ Translation by Khan. See Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, p. 205.

⁸⁸ The form ḥāla does not seem to derive from ḥawāla. Both ḥāla (חאלה) and ḥawāla (חואלה) appear in relation to debts in the ledgers, though in different contexts. The term ḥāla precedes certain periods of time (months, days) and therefore concerns the period of repayment. In contrast, the term ḥawāla precedes personal names or functionaries, for example ḥawāla-yi wakīl (חואלה וכיל; Ms. Heb. 8333.206=4, 10v:16). This raises the possibility that the term ḥawāla is given in the sense of “assignment”, denoting the transfer of a debt from one debtor to a new one. For further details, see K. Bälz, “Ḥawāla, Money Transfer”, EI ³.

⁸⁹ Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, p. 13.

⁹⁰ For other instances of the use of bar in dates, see Lazard, La langue, §635.

⁹¹ Humāyūn, “Kābīn-nāma”, p. 13.

⁹² Ibid.

⁹³ Gronke, Arabische und persische Privaturkunden, p. 10.

⁹⁴ For the tax receipts, see Khan, G., Arabic Documents from Early Islamic Khurasan (London, 2007), docs. 1-24Google Scholar. For the legal documents in which the presence of witnesses is mentioned, see ibid., docs. 25-32.

⁹⁵ Khan, Arabic Documents, p. 64. For the Bactrian documents, see Sims-Williams, N., Bactrian Documents from Northern Afghanistan (Oxford, 2000-2009), i, docs. W, X, YGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁶ Khan, Arabic Documents, p. 64. It should be noted that the Arabic and Bactrian documents do not overlap in function. Furthermore, the Arabic documents were issued by the Arab tax authorities (docs. 1-24) or involved at least one party with an Arabic name (docs. 25-32), whereas none of the parties in the Bactrian documents is an Arab.

⁹⁷ Gronke, Arabische und persische Privaturkunden, p. 11.

⁹⁸ Cf. the formulaic structure of the acknowledgments from Fatimid Fusṭāṭ (Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, pp. 203-207.)

⁹⁹ Translation by Grohmann (Grohmann, Arabic Papyri, ii, docs. 105:12-13, 106:10-11, 107:9-10, 109:10-11, 110:9-11). A more elaborate formula appears in ibid., doc. 111:10-11.

¹⁰⁰ Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, docs. 37:8-9, 39:6-7, 40:7-9, 41:5-6, 42:8-9.

¹⁰¹ Translation in ibid., p. 206.

¹⁰² Translation in ibid., docs. 38:12, 39:7-8, 41:6.

¹⁰³ See Burhān al-Dīn Maḥmūd b. Aḥmad al-Bukhārī, Al-Muḥīṭ al-burhānī fī al-fiqh al-nuʿmānī, (ed.) Aḥmad, Naʿīm Ashraf Nūr (Karachi, 2004), xxii, p. 119Google Scholar. Most sources state that Ibn Māza's year of death is 616/1219, but Pritsak argued for 570/1174, stating that 616/1219 was the date of death of his brother Muḥammad (see Pritsak, O., “Āl-i Burhān”, Der Islam, 30 (1952), p. 89CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

¹⁰⁴ Al-Bukhārī, Al-Muḥīṭ, xxii, 118. Attested also in Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, doc. 42:9.

¹⁰⁵ Translation by Abbott. See Abbott, N., The Monasteries of the Fayyūm (Chicago, 1937), doc. III:10Google Scholar. Retrieved from the online “Arabic Papyrology Database”, available at www.naher-osten.lmu.de/apd.

¹⁰⁶ See Khadr, “Deux actes”, p. 327. The term rajʿa also appears as a potential defect in a sale transaction in several documents from Upper Egypt. See, e.g., Grohmann, Arabic Papyri, ii, docs. 64:15, 65:13, 66:11, 68:12. For a discussion of the term rajʿa, as well as the other terms that denote a potential defect of a sale transaction, see Wakin, J. A., The Function of Documents in Islamic Law: The Chapters on Sales from Ṭaḥāwī's Kitāb al-Shurūṭ al-Kabīr (Albany, 1972), p. 85Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Khan, Arabic Legal and Administrative Documents, p. 206.

¹⁰⁸ Ibid., p. 207; Grohmann, Arabic Papyri, ii, docs. 99:3; 105:3, 14; 106:3, 12; 107:3, 10-11; 108:3, 11-12; 109:3, 12; 110:3,11; 111:4, 11; 112:3-4, 12-13.

¹⁰⁹ The second group of the NLI collection, which was mentioned above, contains nearly twenty Persian legal documents or fragments thereof, dated to the second half of the 12^th century and early 13^th century, with only two written in Arabic (Ms. Heb. 8333.66=4, Ms. Heb. 8333.161=4). Based on this finding, we may assume that during the several decades before the Mongol invasion Persian was already the main language used for legal writing in the area of Bāmiyān.

¹¹⁰ Lazard, G., “The Rise of the New Persian Language”, in The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 4: The Period from the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs, (ed.) Frye, R.N. (Cambridge, 1975), p. 630Google Scholar.