[194] Agrippa’s Letter to Caligula; Philo _Leg._, 39, quoted in Juster _loc. cit._, p. 139, note 1. [195] Acts vi, 7 et seqq. [196] Acts xxi, 28f; (xxiv, 6; xxi, 29); xxvi, 21; (xxiii, 6, 29; xxiv, 5, 12ff; xxv, 7f. 27; xxii, 24, 30); xxiv, 6 (8); xxiii, 3, 9. [197] _Antiq._, XX, ix, 1. Jos. Lehmann, _Révue d. Etudes juives_, XXXVII, 1898, pp. 13, 14. [198] See note 33. [199] Juster, _l. c._ 122-149, from a thorough examination of the sources comes to the conclusion that the Sanhedrin preserved the right of both pronouncing and of carrying out a capital sentence until the year 70 C. E. [200] In Rom. 1, 6, c. 7, quoted by Juster, _ibid._, p. 150. [201] Didascalia Ch. xxvi, 6; xix, 2. Juster, _ibid._ [202] See note 33. [203] Sanh. 52b. [204] J. Meg. III, 2. 74a. Graetz (3rd edit.), IV, 284f. Bacher, _Agad. d. pal. Amoraer_, II, 94f. For a different interpretation, see Perles, _Monatsschrift_, XXXVII, 359-361. [205] Ber. 58a. [206] Baba Kamma 117a, 117b. [207] Sanh. viii, 7. According to tradition, the offender may be killed _flagrante delicto_ in the three cases there mentioned, only if he has received legal warning (see to notes 153-158), and if a lesser physical injury would be insufficient to prevent the crime. Mishna Sanh. ix, 6 mentions three other cases, in at least one of which the zeal of the one who would strike down the offender is restrained by a number of conditions. [208] Sabb. 156a. [209] Ep. ad. African. Par. 14. Juster _l. c._, p. 151, note 2. [210] Sanh. 51b. [211] Mishna Sanh. xi, 1. [212] Sanh. 86a. [213] Tos. Sanh. xiv, 1; Sanh. 71a. [214] See note 98. [215] Deut. xxi, 18-21; Mishna Sanh. viii, 1-5; Tos. Sanh. xi, 6; Sanh. 71a. [216] Note 120. [217] Sanh. 81b. [218] Sanh. 51b. [219] E. g. Judah ben Tabbai and Simon ben Shetach, Mishna Macc. i, 6; Macc. 5b; Sanh. 37b. [220] J. Pes. VI, 1 beginning, 33a. [221] Sanh. 53a, top, makes the claim that the decisions concerning the four methods of capital punishment are traditional. [222] Mishna Macc. i, 10. [223] It is not unlikely that both statements represent historical theory rather than historical fact, a suggestion that seems to find support from the words that follow, in which Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon claim that had they been members of a Sanhedrin, the death sentence would never have been imposed. [224] See notes 104 and 105. [225] Tur, Hoshen Mishpat, I. 3. [226] Responsa XVII, 8. Cf. Teshuboth Ha-Rashba, II, 290. [227] Lindo, _The Jews of Spain_, p. 150f. [228] Responsa XVI, 1. [229] Ber. 62b, 72a. [230] Yad, Hilchoth Hobel u-Mazzik, viii, 2. [231] Judah ben Asher, Responsa Zichron Jehuda f. 55b, No. 75, quoted by David Kaufman, _Jew. Quart. Rev._ 1896, VIII, pp. 219f. [232] Ibid. [233] Responsa of Rashba V, 290. [234] Kaufmann, _Ibid_, pp. 221-238 gives all the details of this interesting leading case. [235] Lindo, _Jews of Spain_, 160-162. Graetz, _Geschichte_, VIII, 44.