The American Jewish Archives Journal, Volume LXI 2009, Number 1

7 inches (178mm) wide. 321 The text can be identified as a letter on papyrus from
the administrators of Bet-Mašiko to Yešua‘ ben Galgula published as Wadi
Murabba‘at Papyrus No. 42 in 1960. 322
By November the negatives had still not been received. Bamberger, who
was responsible for “scholarly projects and public relations,” 323 pushed Glueck
to follow up with Broshi. Bamberger hoped that, at the very least, some of
the four hundred negatives could be sent that so that the College could hold
a public event and garner publicity. 324 Given the financial investment and the
very limited access promised in return, the only real benefit that the College
could hope for was the publicity for the school.
Bamberger was not the only one concerned that monies had been sent but
that no goods had been received. The College librarians and Glueck were rather
concerned and were curious as to the whereabouts of the negatives. 325 Two weeks
later Broshi replied that the materials had mostly been photographed and that
some 1,200 negatives were already copied. He offered to bring them personally
to the College’s representative in New York in January 1971. 326
Broshi’s letter of December 1970 raised a significant new issue. While the
original agreement between Glueck and Harman satisfied the Israelis, another
group had an interest in who would control and have access to a set of negatives.
After the discovery of the Cave 4 cache in 1952, the Jordanian government, who
at that time controlled the area where the scrolls were found, granted publication
rights to scholars picked by G. Lankester Harding, the Jordanian director of
antiquities, and de Vaux, of the École Biblique et Archéologique Française, who
chaired the board of trustees of the Palestine Archaeological Museum (later the
Rockefeller), where the fragments were housed. 327 As an act of goodwill after
the capture of East Jerusalem and the museum, the Israeli authorities allowed
these scholars to maintain their exclusive publication rights. 328 To maintain
quiet from the members of this editorial team, a group of “worried unfriendly
people,” 329 a formal restrictive agreement was to be required of HUC-JIR that
would explicitly prohibit the use of the negatives (and presumably the positives
that had not yet been made and would later prove an issue), “for study, reproduction
or any other purpose,” 330 without the express written permission from the
board of directors of the Shrine of the Book. The agreement raised particular
concerns for Zafren, who could not understand why the College would pay “a
rather large sum of money to have a negative made and then [would be] asked to
become the custodian of materials that [could not] be used for any purpose—and
this without time limit.” 331 The College delayed its response to the agreement,
first while it decided how to respond, 332 and then as a result of Glueck’s death
on 12 February 1971. His successor, Alfred Gottschalk, responded to the draft
agreement in November 1971 with a modified version based on suggestions
from Zafren. 333 In contrast to the draft Broshi forwarded, the College agreed
to “not use or allow the use of the negatives for reproduction or for any purpose
50 • American Jewish Archives Journal