RABBINIC AUTHORITY- POWER SHARING

status of the rabbi and his relationship with the berurim is not clear. We do, however, know that the herem was invoked by both groups. Taqanot protected the honor of the rabbi. Excommunication could result from infringements of their rights.

If we move to the nearby society of North Africa in the fourteenth century we find a distinctive difference between the old native communities and the new Spanish immigrant settlements. The former were governed by a zaqen(elder) appointed by the secular government. He had complete power over the rabbinate. The immigrants’ community was ruled more democratically, as we learn from Simon ben Zemah Duran . Yet, even in that community taganot could be passed independently without approval of the rabbinate and the herem could be applied without their consent.’

David Ibn Abi Zimra provided a description of the new immigrant communities of Turkey in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. All were recent exiles from Spain and so organized themselves according to local Iberian traditions. The gehillah(community) was a separate entity responsible for its own internal affairs as well as some charitable ventures. It was governed by a group of parnasim[leaders(of a community)] who were either elected by the community or who appointed their own SUCCesSors.

Each gehillah in Turkey selected its own rabbi and pledged itself to support that individual in every way including attending his services, utilizing his judicial decisions and listening to his sermons.'® However, the rabbi had to gain the consent of the community before he was given communal control. It is unclear to what extent the various rules and regulations(taganot) were passed by the community leaders(parnasim or berurim) or with the rabbinate. Occasionally the parnasim had to decide a conflict between rabbis who claimed authority over a community.

89