[Avodah] Characterizing our era

[Lisa Liel]

On 8/11/2011 12:42 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> I was actually thinking in entirely different terms.
>
> Speaking historically, we can speak of Anshei Kenesses haGedolah, the
> Zugos, the tannaim, amoraim, savora'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim,
> and...?
>
> But I was thinking halachically. (And I just paused to approve a post
> by RnCL who appears to be thinking along the same lines.) A world in
> which the zugos are a subclass of tannaim, because tannaim felt free
> to consider them baalei pelugta. Similarly, rishonim didn't feel a
> particular requirement to justify differing with geonim, as long as
> they were consistent with their understanding of Chazal. We can argue
> whether the lines are mandatory, convention, mandatory only in the case
> of tannaim vs amora'im, etc.. but in practice, we do find these eras of
> halachic authority.
>
> And I'll note but not dwell on the question of whether savoraim should
> be considered amoraim or geonim (ie very very early rishonim).

I think a lot depends on what the criteria are that we're using to 
define the categories.  For example, the dividing line between Tannaim 
and Amoraim is pretty clear.  It's the finalization of the Mishnah, no? 
  Anyone whose career ended before that is a Tanna, and anyone whose 
career began after that is an Amora, and those who straddled it have 
ambiguous status.

What similar demarcation is there to divide between Zugot and Tannaim? 
None that I can really think of.  What would be the demarcation line 
between Amoraim and Geonim?  Presumably the finalization of the Gemara, 
no?  Which, since the Savoraim did the post-hora'ah editing of the 
Gemara, would have them straddling the eras as well.

My question is, what is the demarcation between Rishonim and Achronim? 
When is the earliest known instance of a rabbi treating earlier rabbis 
as "Rishonim" and excluding himself?  And has there been anything 
comparable since that division that could justify declaring the era of 
the Achronim to be over?  Are we going to use the publication of the 
Shulchan Aruch + Mappah as one and... the Shoah (?) as the other?  And 
can either of those really be justified in light of the hugeness of the 
earlier demarcations?

Lisa