in the enormous mass of talmudic legal material. The primary expression of the ruler’s power and this principle lay in his appointment of the Exilarch, the head of the Jewish community; he was often appointed through consultation with the head of one of the Talmudic academies, but this was a courtesy or a wise political gesture, not mandatory and the appointment itself lay outside the jurisdiction of the rabbinic authorities.
We do not know the reason for Samuel’s statement or why he had to make explicit what had been implicit and de facto. We may speculate that he sought to ingratiate himself with the ruler through this effort. Perhaps in the face of border tensions between the Parthian and Romans he felt the need for a declaration of loyalty. Samuel might have sought to make this statement a firm part of the Jewish legal system. No contemporary or later rabbinic authority provided a reason for Samuel’s enactment. They reported that he was close to the Persian ruler, but that does not provide a rationale for his statement. As neither the Talmud nor Parthian documents shed light on this matter, speculation is futile.’
The statement in the tractate Gittin came from Samuel himself, while the others quoted him. In Gittin, the problem discussed was a mishnaic statement which validated documents issued by a Gentile court and witnessed by Gentiles. The only exceptions were documents of divorce and manumission of slaves. Samuel’s statement agreed with this while others felt that some documents were also excluded. Samuel’s statement also meant that earlier mishnaic statements which permitted the evasion of the king’s taxes, were now rejected(M. Ned. 3.3); this had also troubled rabbinic authorities of the Talmud and they concluded that the Mishnah referred only to an unauthorized tax collector( Ned. 28a) or one who did not proceed in a legal fashion (B.K. 113b). Rabba reported three rules which were given to him by Ukbar ben Nehemia, the Exilarch in which he further clarified the meaning of Samuel’s rule as applying to documents which recognized the transfer of property, but not those which actually made the transfer