Yerushalmi Gittin 9:8 ירושלמי גיטין ט׳:ח׳

MISHNAH: It is valid if some of the text remained and was written in the second column¹³⁵The scribe folded the sheet so that it formed two columns. He then used both columns for the text. The witnesses then signed at the end. (The Babli, 88a, points out that this is valid only if the parchment or paper was folded, not if the two columns were glued together since they originally might have been parts of two different documents.), with the witnesses signing below. If the witnesses signed on top of the page, or at the sides¹³⁶The signatures are disregarded unless they are affixed at the end of the document, exactly one line from the end of the text., or on the other side for a simple document¹³⁷In contrast to a sealed document., it is invalid. If [two bills of divorce] start at the same place¹³⁸Two bills written on the same sheet, one from the middle to the bottom, the other from the middle to the top. The signatures do not belong to either text. and the witnesses are in the middle, both are invalid. If the start of one bill is next to the end of the other and the witnesses are at the end, the bill whose witnesses are read with the end is valid. A bill of divorce written in Hebrew with its witnesses signing in Greek, written in Greek with its witnesses signing in Hebrew, or one witness signing in Hebrew and one in Greek¹⁴¹If there is only one document to be certified, it makes no difference if one signature is read from the right and the other from the left., or the scribe wrote with one witness, is valid. “X, witness” is valid. “The son of Y, witness” is valid¹⁴²If the signature was recognizable as that of a certain person, the exact wording of the signature is irrelevant.. “X the son of Y”, but he did not write “witness”, is valid. If he wrote his or her surname¹⁴³The family name (in addition to the proper name but without the patronymic), in a society where family names were not common., it is valid; that is how the punctilious in Jerusalem used to write.

HALAKHAH: “If some of the text remained,” etc. What does “remained” mean? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Baibon said, e. g., “true, valid, and clear¹³⁹The expression “remained” implies that most of the text was in the first column. It is now asserted that the document is valid even if only the last line is written in the second column, in which the husband asserts that the contents of the bill conform to his wishes. (The Babylonian formulary has only the words “valid and true”.) Cf. M.A. Friedman, Jewish Marriage in Palestine (Tel Aviv 1980) Vol. 1, p. 478, Note 112..”

And what is invalid for a simple document is valid for a “knotted” one if it is on the back¹⁴⁰Cf. Chapter 8:12 for the rules of simple and sealed (knotted) documents..

¹⁴⁷In the ms., Halakhah 10 starts only at 50d, line 12. Rav said: Judges may sign even if they cannot read, but no witnesses may sign unless they know how to read¹⁴⁸If judges sign the document, they only certify that it was presented to them and they attest to the genuineness of the signatures. Therefore, judges who do not know Greek can certify Aramaic signatures on a Greek document. But the witnesses testify to the genuineness of the document and they may be called to testify about its meaning; they are prohibited from signing unless they can read and understand it. In the Babli, Ketubot 109a/b, the rule is attributed to R. Ḥiyya, Rav’s uncle.. He said, such should come over me¹⁴⁹An oath; the speaker invokes all kinds of bad things which should happen to him if he ever did what he denies doing. if I ever acted thus¹⁵⁰He never acted on what he permitted in theory.. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose: Did no Greek document come before Rav that he could confirm it by its signatures¹⁵¹Since Rav exercised jurisdiction only in Babylonia, it is quite possible than no Greek document ever came before him.? The Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “A bill of divorce written in Hebrew with its witnesses signing in Greek, written in Greek with its witnesses signing in Hebrew, or one witness signing in Hebrew and one in Greek, is valid¹⁵²Does this not mean that the witness signing in Greek did not know Hebrew and vice-versa?.” He explains that they knew how to read but not how to sign; or if they knew both [languages], they could sign in either one of their choice.

Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion¹⁵³The Mishnah which lets the witnesses sign in any way they choose, if only their signatures are characteristic for them.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is Rebbi Jehudah’s¹⁵⁴Who in Mishnah 3 requires a lengthy text.. Rebbi Yose said, you should not infer that the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan is that he differs, but he answered him following his argument. Lengthwise¹⁵⁵Mishnah 9 speaks of the case that the sheet containing the bill was folded lengthwise, with the two columns then in parallel. This may be ascribed to R. Jehudah who in Mishnah 3 requires that the text be very specific in detailing the divorce.
The editio princeps reads instead of לאורכו two words לא רבו and takes it together with the next statement: לא רבו דו אמא: “Was it not his teacher who said”, viz., one supports R. Yose, who is quoted in Chapter 3, Note 66, that his teacher R. Jeremiah quoted his own teacher R. Ze‘ira to the effect that one does not have to worry that two men, both called X ben Y, divorce their wives, both called A bat B, at the same place on the same day. Therefore, one does not have to worry either that a person whose characteristic signature consists only of one word be taken for another person.. That is what he said in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: Since pairing is infrequent, there was no pairing. So is the Mishnah: “If the scribe wrote with one witness, is it valid¹⁵⁶J. N. Epstein (² מבוא לנוסח המשנה, p. 476–477) notes that in most documents from the Genizah, at the end the scribe appended his own name. The Mishnah admits this declaration as testimony to the genuineness of the document. This is rejected by the Babli, 88a, in the name of R. Jeremiah. Cf. M.A. Friedman, Jewish Marriage in Palestine Vol. 1, p. 489.. “X” is valid. “The son of Y” is valid¹⁴²If the signature was recognizable as that of a certain person, the exact wording of the signature is irrelevant.. “X the son of Y” but he did not write “witness”, is valid¹⁵⁷In the revised version, no witness has to declare that he signs as a witness; his signature at the correct place automatically justifies it.. If he wrote his or her surname, it is invalid¹⁵⁸Evrybody, including J. N. Epstein, considers this as a scribal error for “valid”. But it might mean that the family name alone, without a proper name, is invalid.. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even if he wrote “he is it¹⁵⁹Reading אִינּוֹ for הִנּוֹ. This is acceptable as a signature as long as it was written in a characteristic way that would be difficult to counterfeit, more or less in the tradition of Sephardic rabbinical signatures through the ages.”, it is valid. Rebbi Abbahu wrote א. Rav Ḥisda wrote ס.¹⁶⁰Probably in a very convoluted manner. In the Babli, 87b, a number of rabbis are mentioned who wrote their names in the form of a picture: R. Ḥanina a palm branch, Rav a beehive, Rabba bar Rav Huna a sail (the latter was imitated in the 18th. Cent. by R. H. Y. D. Azulay.) Samuel wrote a palm branch.