Dr. Einar C. Erickson
Ancient Document Mormon Scholar
Main Menu
Articles View Hits


In the council of community there shall be twelve and three priests who are perfect in all that has been revealed of the whole law, true witnesses, practicing truth and righteousness, and justice and loving devotion and walking humbly each with his man, his fellows, in order to maintain faithfulness in the land with a steadfast intent and a broken spirit.


About forty years ago I put on a tape, and eventually a CD, (The CAIRO GENIZA #37)  the research I had done on the discovery, recovery and content of thousands of documents found in an old Geniza in a old Synagogue in Cairo, Egypt. The Geniza is a vault or room, used for the deposit of old worn, discarded or no longer used, scared documents.  An article in the Jerusalem Post in February 2013 recalled all of this for me.

The Cairo Geniza was the document storehouse  or storage place of the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Fustat, old Cairo, which was called Babylon in pre-Moslem days. It had been the site of an old Roman fort and before that a sixth century BC Persian fort. In this area a sizable Coptic Christian and Jewish center developed. The synagogue was originally a Christian  church dedicated to St . Michael, but had been transferred according to some accounts to the Jews during the brief Persian re-occupation in AD 616.  A sale to the Jews in AD  882 after the Arab conquest, is recorded. After that the synagogue's Geniza received all kinds of texts. Then it was a suburb of Cairo until it was swallowed up by the  Egyptian capital's urban sprawl. (Deuel p. 353)

The first modern traveler who appears to have known of the Geniza was Heinrich  Heine's great-uncle, Simon van Geldern, who visited it in the mid-eighteenth century and wrote in his diary of the likelihood that valuable manuscripts were buried there.  Nearly one hundred years later, the Hebrew scholar,  Jacob Saphir, known for his explorations in the ruins of Yeman, visited the Geniza. It was difficult but he was permitted access to the vault and plowed through the accumulated manuscript debris for two days, until he had his fill of the dust and dirt. Not long after, Abraham Firkovich, a Russian Jew of the Karaite sect which may have an ancient connection to the people of the Dead Sea Scrolls had access to the Geniza.  He was a rogue , scholar, fanatic, and one of the oddest ancient manuscript collectors there ever was.  It was due to him that the Leningrad Library came to possess one of the most extensive collections of selected Hebrew manuscripts in the world.  I had made two visits to Leningrad with my wife and another alone in part trying to get information on this collection, all I learned was that they had been there  before WW 11, but during the war, they with other valuables, were taken to a storage place east of the Ural Mountains. After the war, knowledge of them had disappeared. Decades later they showed up again, but were suspected of being forgeries, it took a long time before experts were brought to Russia to confirm they were authentic.

Firkovich (or Firkowitch) ruthlessly looted synagogues and Genizas, including some in the Crimea, a place my wife and I immensely enjoyed. He seems to have been the first to grasp the enormous value of these repositories. He operated in secret so nobody knows his sources. He was motivated, as a Karaite, by a desire  to prove to the Russian Czarist government that the Karaites had been domiciled in the Crimea since pre-Christian times, and were therefore unlike Rabbinic Jews, innocent of both the execution of Christ and the authorship of  the hated Talmud. Though the chronology of his claims were dubious he was successful. The Russian Imperial Government exempted Karaites from the discrimination and pogroms against Jews.  But he had also falsified documents, antedated inscriptions on tombstones in Karaite cemeteries in the Crimea and in Bukhara, and therefore created a cloud of suspicion over his collection. (Deuel pp. 353-354)  Firkowitch while traveling in the east had apparently had access to the Cairo Geniza whence several of the most precious fragments of the Leningrad collection are believed to have come from. There were actually two collections, the first was restricted to just Hebrew documents and was sold by Firkowitch himself to the Russian Public Library. The second collection that consisted over more than 2500 documents had 1,592 written on parchment alone, with another 725 written on paper. These were acquired by the library in 1876, soon after his death. (Kahle 2. pp. 2-3)  Some of the Firkowitch collection contains some documents from the Dead Sea Scroll discovery.  Somebody had already found and recovered documents from the Qumran area that not only found their way into the Firkowitch collection but some had been added to the Geniza more than eight hundred years earlier.  Someone else, perhaps quite a few,  had access to the Geniza long before these intrepid collectors. In the Leningrad Library there is a collection of nearly 1,200 fragments from the Geniza called the Antonin Collection, brought there by a Russian Archimandrite in Jerusalem. Kahle had seen these fragments in 1926 in Leningrad. (Kahle 2. pp. 4-6) 

At one time or other there may have even been a traffic in scrolls from the Dead Sea region where later discoveries were made of the Dead Sea Scrolls.  The Firkovich collection was eventually found and a special team, including some from Australia went to Russia to examine the documents and determine their authenticity and antiquity which they successfully did. They are by far the largest and oldest collection of Hebrew documents in the world, but who has access to them?  Very little of the content of the collections have been made available, though some translating work may have been or is being done. 

In 1888, Elkan N, Adler, brother of the English Chief Rabbi, made his first visit to the Old Cairo Synagogue, but was not able to see the Geniza, having been told that its books had been buried in the cemetery. The synagogue was renovated in 1890 and the Geniza's existence became better known. The beadles of the synagogue began to realize the propensity of dealers in Cairo for ancient documents, "refuse" of centuries, and were willing to pay considerable sums. Masses of Geniza scraps filtered into the hands of private collectors. Libraries of the West, the Bodleian, the British Museum, the Libraries of Frankfort, Berlin, Philadelphia, Budapest, and many more got their share. The source of all these treasures remained guess work. Rumors abounded and brought to Cairo avid collectors and buyers such as A.H. Sayce, Grenville Chester, and the Russian Archimandrite Antonin. In 1896 Adler returned and was allowed to spend nearly four hours inside the Geniza and take away all he could carry in an old Torah mantle (vestment for Pentateuch scrolls of Jewish services) which he borrowed for the purpose.  Adler later wrote about this episode in his The Ancient Synagogue Near Cairo. (Deuel p.355)


The two enterprising lady Orientalists, the learned Scottish ladies,  Mrs. Agnes Smith Lewis and Mrs. Margaret Dunlop Gibson, (Kahle 2 p. 6) who had been fortunate in finding ancient  on their many trips to the Middle East, had decided to stay in England the winter of 1895-1896 at home in Cambridge, but were looking forward to productive months in Palestinian-Syric texts they had previously photographed at Sinai but a rumor came to them that there might be a chance for finding something in Egypt, so early in 1896 they were once again on the manuscript trail in the Near East.  Then due to an outbreak of an epidemic in Cairo they left abruptly rather than submit to ignominious quarantine regulations. But they had obtained some scraps of manuscripts. They  added to their trip a visit to Jerusalem, unwillingly undertaken, but proved to be most fruitful in results.  In Jerusalem they purchased a large Hebrew text of the Pentateuch. While passing through the Plain of Sharon, near the coast, they were offered a bundle of various fragments, mostly in Hebrew, but a deal. Upon taking ship in Jaffa, they had unexpected difficulties at the customs house because of the embargo on the export of Palestinian antiquities, particularly of books. The Hebrew fragments, above  all, drew the attention of the officials. But, Joseph, the ladies native guide, who knew that personal prayer books of both the Bible and the Koran, were exempt from any restrictions, exclaimed indignantly, pointing to the leaves under scrutiny:  "Do you not see they are Hebrew? The ladies say their prayers in Hebrew. Do you want to prevent them saying  their prayers?" This saved the day for the Scottish-Presbyterian ladies, and the pursuit of scholarship, they were allowed to depart and were back in England in May. There they sorted out their acquisition, the Hebrew portions they thought may be from the Talmud or private Jewish documents. These they wanted to submit to a friend, the noted Hebraist, Solomon Schechter at Cambridge. This would change the lives of all of them. (Deuel pp. 355-356)    


Schechter has an uncertain birthday, perhaps 1847 or 1849 or even 1850, but he was born in a little Rumanian town of  Focsani in the Carpathian Mountains. His father was the ritual slaughterer, migrating to Rumanian from Russia driven by one of its pogroms. He was raised in a ghetto in Eastern Europe. While he did not receive any secular education until well into his twenties, he was, at the age of three, enrolled in Talmudic studies and the joyous mysteries of the Hassidic sect of eastern Jewry.  He did not seem scared by the ghetto life or the strict discipline of the Talmudic studies where he was recognized as a child prodigy in Talmudic learning.  At the age of five he had memorized the  Pentateuch, then followed years of study in religious schools and colleges, a drudgery that often exasperated him. But he benefited from the sharp dialectic discipline of which he became a master. Thirsting for knowledge he first went to Poland, then to Vienna and eventually to Berlin. In Berlin he acquired the incisive methods of the German historical school, which had great influence on his life. He was the first to apply meticulous textual study to Jewish religious literature, thus he acquired an abiding interest in the old manuscripts which were the basis of all such work. When at last an auditor at the universities of Vienna and Berlin, he encountered Western learning, but unlike many gifted Jews he did not abandon his beliefs or adopt the attitudes of the Western intelligentsia. (Deuel pp. 356-357)

He was a large man, with a massive physical frame, imposing leonine head, shaggy auburn mane and beard commanding attention everywhere. They say that there was a constant stream of impromptu sayings that flowed from his lips, unfortunately he did not have a Boswell.  Schechter, never acclimatized to the German cultural environment. He acquired an abiding interest in the old manuscripts and began a lifelong enterprise of editing some of the ancient Talmudic and Midrashic texts. He looked askance at the flourishing schools of Higher Criticism and growing  skeptical approach to the Old testament.  He was wounded by the anti-Hebraic position of  leading German scholars, who deprecated Jewish ethics and denied the Old Testament roots of Christianity.  He was greatly offended when Paul de Lagarde, the celebrated theologian and Orientalist of Gottingen, had his books bound in pigskin so that filthy Jew hands would not touch them, which burned the soul but did not hurt the body. (Deuel pp. 357-358)

His regular haunts were the British Museum and the Bodleian Library  and produced definitive editions of ancient texts.  He was appointed Lecturer and in 1892 Reader of Talmudic at Cambridge University.  In 1884 the university sent him to Italy where for two years he studied Hebrew Manuscripts, where, more fortunate than celebrated scholars such as Tichendorf and Ranke, he had full access to the Vatican collections.  In the course of studying Saadia, the tenth- century head of the Babylonian Rabbinic school, and editing the Abot of Rabbi Nathan, a Talmudic work, Schechter became enamored with the Apocryphon of Ecclesiasticus which only survived in an unsatisfactory translation.  In the Jewish Quarterly Review, in1891 he published quotations of  Ecclesiasticus, part of the Aprocrypha, in Talmudic texts. His preparations for what was to come next was completed. His destiny was to change. (Deuel p.  358)


One of the Orientalist ladies, Mrs. Lewis, ran into Schechter on King's Parade in Cambridge and told him about the manuscripts she wanted to show him. She continued her shopping and went home only to find Schechter already at work sifting through the fragmentsl the two ladies had found,  on her dining room table.  Holding up large parchment leaf he said: "This is part of the Jerusalem Talmud, which is very rare, may I take it away?"  The ladies gave him their consent. This is what the ladies had hoped for. Then anther document caught his eye, a rather dirty torn  piece of paper;  paper as a writing material was a paleographic late innovation, and so had been regarded by the ladies with little respect.  "Who among scholars three years ago set any store whatever by Hebrew paper?"   But a passage immediately struck him, he had a hunch it might be the Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus lost for nearly a thousand years.  He could not verify it immediately because the ladies, being protestant. did not have a bible with it in. Somewhat skeptical, Mrs. Lewis gave him permission to take the paper with him for identification, only too happy if he found it worth publishing. He hastened to the Cambridge library and wrote her a note to congratulate her, the fragment represents a piece of the original Hebrew Ecclesiasticus, one of the books of the Apocrypha, considered canonical at the Council of Jerusalem in 1672, but never included in Protestant Bibles. The American Bible Society does not include them in any of the bibles they distribute worldwide. (Miller p. 224; D&C 91:1-2) It was the first time such a thing has been discovered, telling the ladies not to speak about it to anyone and that he would come to them the next day to talk over the matter with them.  He was greatly excited. Returning home he told his wife that his name would never perish [and he was right] and to telegraph the ladies and request the ladies to come immediately. The ladies received the telegram before the letter and promptly went to Schechter's small house in an unfashionable section of Cambridge. It was then agreed that Mrs. Lewis would alert the public of the discovery through the Athenaeum  and the Academy, with a description of the document he would provide. (Deuel p 358-360) It was the first announcement of something important from the Cairo Geniza.

The Book of Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sira (Sirach) had come down only in non-Hebrew versions, first translated into Greek by Deuel's grandson in a poor translation, it was included in the AUTHORIZED VERSION of the Bible published in 1895,  just before Schechter's discovery, with the expression of regret that they had only scanty sources for their version.  Now a more acceptable translation could be made and set the long extended debates at rest.  It had been originally composed in Hebrew, St. Jerome had seen it, Saadia was familiar with it, but the great Maimoinides did not.  The Higher Critics were going to get a jolt, they had believed that much of the Old Testament had been composed at about the same time. Now, if it could be proven that the Hebrew of this new discovery resembled that of the canonical books only superficially, the thesis of the Hellenistic origin of Old Testament Book would collapse. Schechter wrote: "Besides , if their original Ecclesiasticus, written about 200 BC if not earlier. included quotations from the Psalms, the whole hypothesis of the Macabean origin of the Psalms-after 160 BC- would go up into thin air. ..it would become certain that between Ecclesiasticus and the books of other Old Testament there must lie centuries, nay there must lie, in most cases, the deep waters of the Captivity, the grave of the Old-Hebrew and the Old Israel, and the womb of the New Hebrew and the New Israel." (Schechter p. 1; Deuel p. 361)  This is in keeping with what Mormons believe. Schechter did not doubt that the badly mutilized Hebrew fragment of some seventeen lines in two columns, represented the original, but there were still some die hard scholars who did not want to give up their position or conclusions who disagreed. However, internal evidence marginal glosses, and above all, recent finds in the Qumran Caves, especially Cave 2, which agreed completely with the Geniza copy corroborated Schechter's views. But this was just the beginning, there was going to be much more; much, much more! Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and like discoveries, there was no precedent in the Hebrew literature, the entire period from before 250 BC to 150 AD, was tabujla rasaa. A contemporary of Schechter greeted the discovery with keen insight: "In all its [the fragment]travels through the ages and after having traversing a whole continent, the insignificant fragment had, by the luckiest of chances, fallen into the hand of the one man prepared by his previous studies to identify it, and it was as if a lost page of the Bible has been restored by modern scholars."  (Joseph Jacobs  in Deuel p. 362)  A new era was dawning for Biblical and Jewish history.

Mrs. Lewis' public release to the Aathenaeum prompted the Oxford Orientalist Adolf Neubauer to examine some Hebrew documents recently acquired by A.H. Sayce in Egypt for the Bodleian Library.  It was astounding!  They were written in the same type of Hebrew and without vowel points which was a post-Biblical system for adding vowels in the Semitic script. They were continuous with the Schechter page and belonged to the same manuscript and so had to have come from the same source!  Somewhere in Egypt!  All the evidence  pointed to the Cairo-Fostat Geniza.  Could more leaves be found?  Schechter promptly set out for Egypt.


Schechter is often called the discoverer of the Geniza, when an anonymous letter in THE TIMES unjustly attached him and claimed the honor for E. N. Adler, with whom Schechter was on good terms,  Schechter answered that the honor of discovering the Geniza belonged to the numberless dealers in antiquities of Cairo, who for many years have continually offered its contents to various libraries of Europe and any buyer who wanted them. Adler had only spent half a day in the Geniza, he had been presented with some manuscripts by the authorities.  A claim to fame for recognizing the Geniza could go to Jacob Saphir. Coming from his recognized work in Yeman, he used great persuasion to be allowed to enter the Geniza in 1864, having been warned by the beadle's [Jewish caretaker] that serpents and dragons lurked there, but he braved the Nilotic beasts and plowed through the ancient debris for two days, until he had his fill of dust and dirt. He seemed not to have found anything  worthwhile, but then he was not trained like Schechter. Schechter knew that most of the discoveries of Egypt were known by the local inhabitants centuries before Europeans wanted a piece of the action, piece by piece.  The fellahin, Egyptian natives,  had known about the tombs and chambers, stair cases and openings of most of the great tombs of Egypt long before the world of archaeology got wind of them, and still new discoveries are coming forth and new technology is reclaiming all of the old work that has gone on before.  He knew his contribution was not lessened because he was preceded by others at the Geniza. "He has the distinction of having traced to the Geniza of Cairo all the numerous Hebrew documents which had appeared on the  market for some time. It was Schechter who put a stop to the arbitrary scattering of the previous manuscripts by unscrupulous synagogue attendants and dealers." (Deuel pp. 363)

A man of enthusiasm and persuasiveness, Schechter had no sooner conceived the idea of finding the Geniza and going there to clear out all of the manuscripts, that he obtained the backing of Charles Taylor, Master of St. John's College, though a mathematician, was one of the outstanding non-Jewish students of Rabbinic literature, and the son of a wealthy London merchant. Taylor provided the funds for the expedition.  All was planned in secrecy, although Schechter communicated with American friends about his aspiration, who forecasted great success even before he had reached Cairo. 

Schechter left in December1896, on an adventure that would change everything and make him  famous.  He found nothing in Cairo, and complained to his American friend that there was no trace of Philo-Judaeus, the Hellenistic Jewish Philosopher and the Cairo Jews were more interested in cotton and other rubbish than in the logos and eternal love. He paid the chief Rabbi a call and was told that he would find very little in Cairo but a few loose sheets. He was disappointed in the commercialism of the time and began to doubt that his hopes of returning laden with spoils, the antiquity of which would command respect, would ever happen , but a visit to the Reverend Grand rabbi of Cairo, Rafail b. Shim'on, [the rabbi who had shown Adler the Geniza] to whom he submitted his introductory testimonials, soon restored his spirits. He was promised full support. (Deuel p. 364)  After all, the belongings of the synagogue were held in trust by the Rabbi and the Wardens.  Schechter also had to win the good will of the lay president of the Jewish community in Cairo, but their Grand Rabbi was the key man, and Schechter won over the Rabbi's chief advisor who was the Rabbi's brother. Schechter wrote to his wife that the "Rabbi is very kind and kisses me on my mouth, which is not very pleasant". In his letter he also reported that he was already at work in the Geniza and had just taken away two big sacks filled with fragments. It was a good start. Schechter, a most outgoing man, made friends with everybody, suddenly Cairo seemed a glorious place. For his enjoyment there was an Italian opera, French dancing masters, English administration, and Mohammedan houris, [head gear and veil a women wears] though he concluded that it was no wonder that they were carefully covered, their faces were so ugly to look at. (Deuel p. 365)

The Cairo Geniza was located at the far end of the ladies gallery at the western side of the synagogue.  Entrance to the secret recess was through a hole high up on the wall, to which  one had to climb on a crude ladder. The ladies Lewis and Gibson, who had  joined Schechter in Cairo,  were allowed to peek into the chamber from which so many fragments had been removed to make glad the hearts of European scholars. But they were shocked to watch an attendant jump through the small opening and hear the crash of ancient vellum beneath his feet. (Deuel p. 365)   They were as outraged as when one learned how Belzoni found the mummies from whence came the Pearl of Great Price scriptures  "by crashing his way through antiquities  'every step I took I crushed a mummy in some part or other'." (Clark p. 81) He had deliberately stepped on the chests of mummies to determine which were first order mummies or those of inferior mummification; the solid first order being the most perfectly preserved  could host treasures in gold, silver, jewels and rolls of ancient documents.  Mrs. Lewis thought with intense amusement and gratification that the discovery the women had made of the fragment of Ecclesiasticus had visited upon Ben Sira, the author of the ancient text, just judgment. He was a misogynist, not one woman was mentioned in his writings, though he listed many male heroes.  Yet here, she pointed out, his original work was brought under the eyes of an European scholar of  his own nation and people, by two women. (Kahle p. 360) 

Schechter had been taken to the Geniza by the Chief Rabbi himself and was stunned and awed by the enormous quantity of the material and the state of confusion it was in. He had permission to enter the Ginza and to take with him the whole contents. (Kahle p. 7) While authorized to claim as much as he wanted, he knew he would have to use some discretion as what to claim. He decided to confine his acquisitions entirely to the older written manuscripts and forego recent printed works which had been added during the previously four hundred years. These he would leave to Adler and Teicher and others to evaluate and collect. (Deuel pp. 365-366)

A letter to his wife, dated August 8, 1897 gave a lively description of the sight that filled his eyes, a literal battlefield of books, leaves, fragments, lumps of a variety of items stuck together, covered with dust and sand, no rhyme or reason for their stacking, many turning to dust from age. Weeks of drudgery followed, day by day, working in the windowless storeroom, he inhaled the churned up dust of centuries, until he injured his health and he to undergo medical treatment. The work turned the robust scholar into an old man and almost broke his health.  He would constantly have complications created by breathing in the ancient dust of discarded manuscripts.  He could not do the job alone, so eventually he enlisted the synagogue's attendants and their kinfolk, some of whom had already removed documents. This  introduced him to Oriental etiquette, including baksheesh, or lavish remuneration, for little or no services rendered, along with much haggling and loss of time and money.  They required him to pay for those who just watched others working,  and to pay women for greeting him respectfully when he showed up to work, and for those who showed deep sympathy in his fits of coughing caused by the dust. He was a driven man, he had no idea of the consequences of his labors. To his dismay, he heard that a dealer in Cairo was offering fragments from the Geniza for sale. He had no choice but to buy them back at exorbitant prices. So much for dependable help in his work. He appealed to the Jewish Community, some member was removing the documents to sell them;  they stopped the practice-at least for the time being. (Deule p. 367)

He packed his selections into huge sacks whose number by the end of January 1898 was thirty.  Fearful of last minute interruptions and inconveniences, he obtained the help of the British Embassy at Cairo. They rushed export permits and his load was expedited to England then he left for Haifa in Palestine to visit his twin brother. Mrs. Lewis learned firsthand that the traffic in Genza documents continued and they appeared on open display in Cairo shops.  Schechter soon learned the Bodleian Library had tried to obtain leftovers from the Geniza, material that had been removed and buried outside the synagogue.  What he had shipped back to England represented about a third of the content of the Ginza. He had selected what seemed the most important documents for him which amounted to nearly 100, 000 items; a great treasure trove of ancient manuscripts. On his way back to England his ship headed for Marseille ran on a rock and nearly sank outside its destination.  A fellow passenger was the great Flinders Petrie, they became fast friends. But now came the real work, the task of assorting, identifying and editing the vast material. The collection become known as the Taylor-Schechter Collection, was made over to the Cambridge University Library which officially made known the acquisition by publishing a list of some of the noteworthy treasures. The Cairo Jewish community was regaled by the university's senate with a hand written parchment, ornately composed in three languages and conveying appreciation for their liberality and the goodwill that they had extended to the Reader in Talmudic. Schechter was awarded the degree of Doctor of Letters from the University and honored with a quotation from Schechter's motivating Ecclesisticus: "Search and examine, seek and find, hold her fast and let her not go." In an article August 8, 1897, in THE TIMES, and a preliminary list of the collection issued by the Library Syndicate in June 1898, Schechter made public some of the most striking finds from the Cairo Geniza. (Deuel pp. 368-369) 


The collection was separated into 184 boxes, some bound in volumes, more than 1800 fragments were put under glass, then Schechter began working all hours of the day clad in a dustcoat and wearing a nose and mouth protector, sifting the fragments one by one, looking  at them with a magnifying glass to identify them and then placing them in its proper box. Scholars came from all over Europe and America to see him at work. (Deuel p. 369) Some were to stay and spend a lifetime working on the vast array of documents.   

Solomon Schechter wrote: "Looking over this enormous mass of fragments about me, in the sifting and examination of which I am now occupied I cannot overcome a sad feeling stealing over me, that I shall hardly be worthy to see all the results which the Geniza will add to our knowledge of Jews and Judaism. The work is not for one man and not for one generation. It will occupy many a specialist and much longer than a life time. However, to use an old adage  'It is not thy duty to complete the work, but neither art thou free to desist from it'." (Quoted in Deuel p. 381)  That is exactly the feeling I have about the research that I am engaged in, I will never complete it, but I cannot desist from it. I have no need of success in order to persevere!

The collections from the Ginza have not as  yet been completely catalogued. As late as 1959, Paul E. Kahle, author of the one comprehensive work on the Cairo Geniza, himself a student of the collection for sixty years, wrote: "Even today thorough examination of the fragments results in the most outstanding discoveries. It will still be a long time before this great treasure can be used to its full advantage." (Kahle p. 13)  Virtually everything that came from the Geniza is of some significance.  


Schechter had had enough of what he called "higher Semitism" and gave up his beloved academic groves of Cambridge to spend his last twelve years in New York.  In 1910, together with related pieces, Schechter published  his famous work on the Fragments of a Zadokite Work, now better known as the Damascus Document. The Publication raised virtually an academic and doctrinal storm, but his thesis was ultimately verified by the finding of the same document among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Someone had found the Caves of Qumran long ago and had brought some of the documents to Cairo where they were eventually consigned to the Geniza until their recovery and translation by Schechter.  From the ancient documents he had postulated an unknown Jewish community which had originated the documents. He called them ZADOKITES, a sect of Jewish dissidents from the Jerusalem priesthood who had founded a separate priest- brotherhood in the pre-Christian era. (Deuel p. 380) But where they were he did not know.  They are now known as the Community of Qumran,  Schechter and Louis Ginzberg, a colleague at the Jewish Theological Seminary, who also wrote of the unknown Jewish Sect, had their research and conclusions mostly confirmed years later when similar documents were recovered from Qumran caves and published, in the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. (Ginzberg p.  xv; Allegro pp. 15-18)   See my several CD's on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Schechter became aligned with Jewish Reformation efforts and produced  a new and more accurate translation of the Jewish Scriptures published in1916.  I find Schechter's translation  most useful in comparing the Joseph Smith Translation of the scriptures with Jewish teachings.``. He was to die, while lecturing on the Cairo Geniza discovery, in 1915 from complication of inhaled dust off the ancient documents.  He was seventy years old.

THE JERUSALEM  POST-FEBRUARY 13-21, 2013                                                                                                                                                                                             

What follows is based on an article contained in the JERUSALEM POST, for the week of February 13-21 by Sam Sokol.  In essence it is part of  "the rest of the story" and involves the two ladies Lewis and Gibson discussed in the foregoing.  But we want to tie together the Damascus Document with the restoration under John the Baptist in D&C 13, Malachi 3.3, the statements of Oliver and Joseph Smith,  D&C 84, and translations of certain Dead Scholl scrolls by Vermes. We want to see how all the threads come together to form a magnificent tapestry.                                                                                                                                                                                                                

 "The documents from the Cairo Geniza were in large part carted off to England and are now held in several collections. All told, they present researchers with an invaluable record of a thousand years of a religious, social, economic and cultural life of the Mediterranean world," said Stuart Roberts a spokesman for Cambridge University. (Sokol p. 8) "The documents reflect nearly thirteen hundred years of the Christian era as seen through an intellectually and economically flourishing community that was an integral part of the great Arab civilization of the Middle Ages. ...and bear in the most varied facets of Arab and Mediterranean history...utterly obscured because of lack of evidence. ...our views about the Crusades appear to be in need of complete revision. Modern histories of the Crusades state that only Frenchmen participated in the First Crusade when it reached the Holy Land, but letters from the Geniza, from that time, testifies to the presence of  'cursed ones....Germans'...these 'pilgrims' did not massacre the entire Jewish population...prisoners were taken...ransomed-much more profitable-for glittering Oriental coins." (Deuel pp. 375-377) The Geniza records reflect a society then far in advance of Europe, and have indicated thereby that many of the institutions and practices of the emergent West, particularly in Trade, finance, and contractual law, were fully anticipated on the other side of the Mediterranean. (Deuel pp. 376-377)  Think of what was going on in Europe  about the end of the 800's when the Cairo Geniza was being built.  Many blank areas for that time and the centuries that followed are being filled in by research on the Geniza Collections. 

Also found were Portions  of the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, (Charlesworth  Vol. l) such as Ecclesiasticus itself, books the Rabbis did their best to conceal, and also the Christian apocryphon such as the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, showing the distinction between such Jewish and Christian works is by no means always clear. It is these sources that are of great interest to Mormons.  I have now compiled in my collection more than 100 of these documents and will begin, soon, a series of studies treating each of them separately, as many of them have parallels to Mormon Doctrine, confirming the restoration and that Joseph Smith was a Prophet.

"In Biblical studies alone, the Geniza started a new era-whose end is not yet in sight--comparable in significance and ramifications to that ushered in by the Dead Sea Scrolls [fifty years later]. Hebraists have spoken of the Age of the Geniza, preceding...the Age of the [Qumran] Caves.  Although very few of the Geniza manuscripts are nearly as old as the Qumran material, their number as well as their range have assured them a place in Old Testament and Jewish scholarship which the scrolls...have only temporarily eclipsed." (Deuel p. 371)  The Age of the Geniza is now in its third generation and gaining momentum as Sokol points out. The Age of the Qumran Caves is now in its second generation and a long way to go, for Mormons it is just getting started. We are now in the first generation of the Age of Diverse Document Discoveries, including those of the Nag Hammadi, Mandaean, Ancient Mesopotamian Tablets, and the recovery of ancient documents through digitalization programs throughout the world.   

As already noted, a geniza is a storehouse for manuscripts, books and letters that cannot be thrown out due to their religious importance, usually attached to a synagogue, especially if they  contain the name of God or reference to Him.  According to Jewish tradition papers  or documents bearing the name of God on them, or biblical texts may not be discarded in a conventional manner. (Sokol p. 8)


Cambridge and Oxford Universities announced on February 8, 2013, their intention to collaborate on a fund-raising effort aimed at purchasing the lady Orientalists Lewis-Gibson Geniza Collection, one of a number of collections made from the original content of the discovery, from the United Reformed Church's Westminister College for l.2  million before it is sold off to private collectors. The intrepid Scottish ladies had gone back to the source again. The Lewis-Gibson collection is a significant historical resource made up of more than 1,700 fragments of manuscripts, in Arabic and Hebrew, dating from the 9th century.  "Given its status as a hand-picked collection, the Lewis-Gibson Collection contains perhaps more than its share of rare unique items compared to its modest size." (Roberts in Sokol p. 8)

The Lewis-Gibson collection is in danger of being sold off and dispersed into private  collections if Cambridge and Oxford are unable to raise the necessary funds to save it. (Roberts in Sokol p.  8) Among the documents in the Lewis-Gibson Collection is a hand-written copy of Moses Maimonides's commentary on the Mishna and the earliest extant copy of a Jewish engagement deed. "This is a rare and special opportunity to jointly acquire the Lewis-Gibson Geniza Collection by Cambridge and Oxford which combined hold almost 70 percent of the fragment in public collections...Together we will share the work of curating conserving... digitizing and presenting the manuscripts,  making the best use of the strengths of each institution."  (Thomas in Sokol p. 8) However, there were more than 300,000 documents in the original discovery and most are in various University and private collections. 

Cambridge is already home to the largest collection of documents from the Geniza. University librarian Anne Jarvis noted that "In the late 19th century, Oxford's Bodleian Library and Cambridge University Library were rivals in trying to acquire materials from the Cairo Geniza.
"today we are taking a different stand, seeking to build on our collections while recognizing that these would be a greater benefit to scholarship if we joined together to save the Lewis-Gibson collection from division and dispersal."  (Sokol p. 8)

After the renovation of the Cairo synagogue in 1890 collections from the Ginza came to the Biblothieque de l'Alliance Israelite in Paris, some to the Stadt-Bibliothek in Frankfurt-am-Main who had the largest collection on the continent; some to the University Library of Strasbourg and there were many private collections such at the Jack Mosseri collection of more than 4,000 documents in Cairo itself. (Kahle 2. p. 6) 

Levana Zamir, the president of the Union des Juifs d'Egypt en Israel, said she found it "fantastic that Cambridge and Oxford universities' libraries are finally joining for the benefit of the Geniza project."  The Geniza documents remaining in Egypt were not being cared for at all by the local antiquities authority, Zamir said. A lot of Geniza documents are still confiscated in Egypt-the Egyptian government decided long ago that the Cairo Geniza is Egyptian property, and as such it has to remain in Egypt. All this would be wonderful if the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo was working on saving the remaining Geniza, which is becoming dust, but they don't, Zamir said." (Sam Sokol , Universities seek to save Cairo Genizah Documents,                                     Jerusalem Post 2-21-13,  Jerusalem, 2013 p. 8)

Over time the Geniza took on additional functions. They came to be the community archive. (Kahle p. 3353) One of the reasons no Hebrew Old Testament texts older than the ninth century were not being found it because of their purposeful elimination by way of the Geniza. General of the Army and Chief of Staff and archaeologist of repute, Yigael Yadin,  said of his father,  E. L. Sukenik,  that "It was my father...who recognized the antiquity and significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls." (Yadin pp. 12,16)  Sukenik was professor of archaeology at the Hebrew University, sitting on the hill just above the Mormon Center in Jerusalem. In his diary he says he first learned of the scrolls on November 1947, responding to a note left two days earlier he had gone to see the dealer who told him of scrolls found in jars, he wondered if someone had found a Genizah (Geniza), a storage place for worn and defectives scrolls. Two days later he visited the Armenian merchant again and  saw two of the jars and  pieces of leather inscribed in a Hebrew script he recognized as dating  from before 100 BC.  On November 29, 1947 Sukenik risked great danger to go to Bethlehem to see more scrolls and take them home for study. His dairy had an entry for December l, 1947. The United Nations had a few days before voted for the partitions of Palestine for a homeland for Israel, his youngest son, a fighter pilot, had been killed when the Arab armies had attacked Israel, and yet he wrote,  having read some of the scrolls, that he considered them as one of the greatest finds ever made in Palestine. (Coss pp. 23-24)  He was right. The Age of the Qumran Caves and Scrolls had begun.  The Age of the Cairo Geniza entered into its second generation.  Among the scrolls was the Damascus Document, which Geza Vermes would translate. But from the fragments in the Cairo Geniza "Solomon Schechter [was] the first editor and translator of the Damascus Document." (Dupont-Sommer p. 55)    


One of the most important documents Schechter recovered from the Geniza was large fragments of what he called the ZADOKITE WORK, which was one his major publication efforts, later recognized as the Damascus Document, because of copies found in four caves of Qumran. Fifty years later with the announcements of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and recovery of documents from eleven caves, found in Caves 3Q, 4Q, 5Q  and  6Q were more fragments of the Damascus Document. (Vermes pp. 19, 27) It was evident somebody had found one of the caves by the Dead Sea and removed at least some portion of or fragments of the Damascus Document, sometime before the ninth century. Those documents found their way to the Cairo Geniza where Schechter recovered them along with thousands of  other documents, many which he eventually published. More than 50 years later, Geza Vermes, assembled the fragments of the Damascus Document from the caves and published them in1956. Forty years later Martinez collected all of the fragments and documents from all of the caves and translated and published them in 1996. (Martinez p. vii)   Mormons have not as yet exploited the work of these three scholars for the many doctrinal Parallels their publications contain of the restoration. For this study I have selected a short reference from the translation by Vermes and an even shorter one by Martinez to draw attention to distinct and unusual parallels, inferences and prophetic aspects that are of considerable interest, and compare them with restoration doctrines in D&C 13 and D&C 84, and statements made by Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith, and the Joseph History in the PGP.  


Malachi and Elijah play a great role in the restoration. Malachi is explaining, about 450 BC, what would happen after Elijah came, saying: "3:3 And he (Christ) shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness." (JST) The  Dead Sea Scroll documents appeared to have been prepared before 200 BC by a society that seemed to have a great deal of knowledge about the last days and who would be in office at that time. The Restoration was in full progress by 1839, essential revelations collected soon after 1832 were being assembled into what  became the Doctrine and Covenants, the focus is, however, on a vital event that  had occurred several years earlier on the banks of a lovely River.  Keep in mind the time of each of the quotes and references utilized in this comparison.


"Ordination of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic Priesthood along the bank of the  Susquehanna River, near Harmony Pennsylvania, May 15, 1829, HC l:39-42) The ordination was done by the hands of an angel, who announced himself as John, the same that is called John the Baptist in the New Testament. The angel explained that he was acting under the direction of Peter, James, and John, the ancient apostles, who held the keys of the higher priesthood, which was called the Priesthood of Melchizedek. The promise was given to Joseph and Oliver that in due time the Priesthood of Melchizedek would be conferred on them. See algo Section 27: 7, 9, 12. "  And it was. ( D&C 128:20)


"Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the KEYS of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer an offering unto the lord in righteousness." (John the Baptist D&C Sec. 13)


Of this event Oliver wrote: "Upon you my fellow servants, in the name Messiah I confer this Priesthood and this authority which shall remain upon the earth, that the Sons of Levi may yet offer an offering [and one acceptable offering is one of fat and blood] unto the lord in righteousness!" (Staker p. 54)

Here the retention on earth of the Priesthood of Aaron continues from ancient times with a futurity that will enable Sons of Levi to offer an acceptable offering of fat and blood.

In 1839, when Joseph recounted what took place on the banks of the river that May of 1829, "he had access to Oliver Cowdery's narrative of the same events and even had Oliver's account reprinted as he prepared his own. He could easily have corrected Oliver's Letter before it was reprinted if he felt it was inaccurate or he could have drawn from Oliver's words if he felt they represented what he wanted to say. Instead he let Oliver's account stand but provided his own as well." (Staker p. 54)  This is a great example of continuous revelation.


Five years after Oliver wrote his citation Joseph writes his: "Upon you my fellow servants in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins [See Section 84 for this elucidation], and this [the priesthood] shall never be taken again [among the Jews the sacrifices ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD; in the dispersion the Jews never offered a fat and blood sacrifice again] from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again [what they once did] an offering [an acceptable offering of fat and blood] unto the Lord in righteousness.  (Joseph History 69; Joseph Smith Papers p. 290; Staker p. 54) The emphasis  always mine.

The first twelve words in both citations are the same. Oliver's has a comma after servant. Both  do not use the article "the" before referring to MESSIAH.  For good reason, they both knew that MESSIAH meant CHRIST.  How would it have been to refer to  "the Jesus Christ?" Messiah and Jesus Christ are interchangeable, they mean the same.  What they both did was reflect a more intimate understanding of Messiah, of Jesus Christ they both had. But Oliver and Joseph went on to say something important about the nature and status of the Priesthood of Aaron.  Joseph had the benefit of Revelation D&C 84 given in1832 and his role as Prophet to integrate the various revelations. (PGP Joseph Smith History 69)

Oliver then states:  "this Priesthood and this authority"  without identifying the priesthood as that of Aaron,  which was the authority he was referring to.

Joseph writes,  and he identified the priesthood authority:  "the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of ministering angels and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for remission of sins".  This is a huge and important explanatory statement.  Joseph of course as prophet seer and revelator, could draw upon the content of many revelations such as the composite  D&C 20, and 107, but especially Section 84, among others, defining the details of this "authority" mentioned by Oliver. Joseph also knew what he wrote would be canonized filling in what Oliver knew. but left out. But these are not all the points to be made.  Staker discusses in details these and other points, because what is next written by both Oliver and Joseph is most interesting.  Staker  also draws attention to the connection to the sacrifice mentioned by Malachi  3:3. and who would offer it and when. (Staker p. 58)

Oliver writes:  "which SHALL REMAIN upon the earth, that the Sons of Levi may yet offer an offering [blood sacrifice] unto the Lord in righteousness!"   He states "shall remain upon the earth" referring to the priesthood authority John is conveying.  And adds, "that the Sons of Levi", linking the priesthood to the "Sons of Levi", and states something they are going to do: my yet offer an offering - the sacrifice of fat and blood, and according to Malachi, something else.  

Joseph wrote:  "and THIS SHALL NEVER BE TAKEN AGAIN [It had been taken from the earth for a time, hence the need for a restoration] from the earth, until the sons of  Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness",  "and this shall never be taken again from the earth" is referring to the Priesthood of Aaron, its keys and the doctrines that attend to it. And then restricts the time to: "until the sons of Levi do offer again [something they have done anciently, but as part of the restoration must do agian]  an offering [sacrifice of fat and blood] that is acceptable to the Lord in righteousness." Both Oliver and Joseph are stating details that are entirely correct, both are correct as Section 84 elucidates with clarifying doctrine.(Staker p. 58)


Now we add to the picture outlined above details given in the powerful and great revelation given in 1832, Section 84: "18. And the Lord confirmed a priesthood also upon Aaron and his seed throughout all their generations, which priesthood also continueth and abideth forever with the priesthood which is after the holist order of God. 19. And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. 20. Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. 21. And without the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh...23.  Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness.... 24...but they hardened their hearts...25. Therefore he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy priesthood also;  26. And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the keys of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel; 27. Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins...until John, whom God raised up...to over through the kingdom of the Jews and make straight the way of the Lord before the face of his people, to prepare them for the coming of their Lord, in whose hand is given all power...[In part to disperse the Jews] 29. ..which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons. ...concerning [who?]the sons of Moses-for the sons of Moses and also the sons of Aaron shall offer [what?] an acceptable offering and sacrifice [where?] in the house [temple] of the Lord...which house [one of the temples in Jackson  County Missouri] shall be built unto the Lord in this his generation upon the consecrated spot as I have appointed-...32. And the sons of Moses and of Aaron shall be filled with the glory of the Lord upon Mount Zion in the Lord's House, whose sons [sons of Moses and Aaron] are ye and also many whom I have called ... 33...For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods...[members of the LDS Church 34. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.  35. And also all they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord;"

Now compare this lengthy quote with the one Gez Vermes translates from the Damascus Document on page 15 below. 


3:3. "...He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness."

Joseph Smith put a slightly different slant on offerings, because there may be two types referred to in the scriptures, so he referred to the "Offering in righteousness" of the sons of Levi and then added: "Let us, therefore , as a church and a people, and as Latter-day Saints, offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness; and let us present in his holy temple...a book containing the records of our dead ,[genealogical records]  which shall be worthy of all acceptation." (D&C 126:24)  "These records, including especially the "book containing the records of our dead are a portion of the "offering in righteousness" referred by Malachi 3:3- [and John the Baptist D&C 13] which we are to present in His Holy temple, and without which we shall not abide the day of his coming. " (Kimball pp. 34-35; Ludlow pp. 401-402; D&C 128:-17) 

Joseph Smith further explained: "It will be necessary here to make a few observations on the doctrine set forth in ...Malachi 3:3, and it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [of the Lord Jesus] was offered up, and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in future; but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties privileges and authority of the priesthood or with the Prophets. The offering of sacrifice [of fat and blood] has ever been connected and forms a part of the duties of the Priesthood. It began with the Priesthood, and it will be continued until after the coming of Christ, from generation to generation. We frequently have mention made of the offering of sacrifice by the servants of the Most High in ancient days, prior to the law of Moses; which ordinances [sacrifice of fat and blood] will be continued when the Priesthood is restored with all its authority, power and blessing. These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the priesthood will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, [in Jackson County, Missouri, one of twenty four temples will be for the Aaronic Priesthood to fulfill their restored functions] and the sons of Levi  be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their power, ramifications and blessings. This ever did and ever will exist when the powers of the Melchizedic Priesthood are sufficiently manifest; else how can the restitution [restoration] of all things spoken of by the holy Prophets be brought to pass? ....but those things which existed prior to Moses' day, namely sacrifice, will be continued." (Jackson pp. 67-68)

"John ...brought back the commission and power whereby the Sons of Levi shall offer again in righteousness those offerings which they made in ancient days." (McConkie p. 599)


Gez Vermes translates a portion of the Damascus Document:"For God chose them not from the beginning of the world and before they were created [born on earth] He already knew their works...He knew the years of (their) office, the number and exact epochs of their appointed times from all eternity and for ever more, that which shall befall  at the appointed times of all the years of the world. (fn. God knows all that is to come). And in each [epoch, dispensation] of them. He raised up for Himself (men) called by name in order to leave (a group of) survivors [those who become exalted] for the land [that they would] people the universe with their seed. [Martinez translates seed as 'offspring'; who ever taught such a thing?]; (D&C 132:19)  He [God] made known His holy spirit [Holy Ghost] unto them through His Anointed One  [Messiah, Jesus Christ] ...

Vermes continues: "...The first members of the Covenant became culpable and were  given over to the sword: because they had forsaken the Covenant of god, chosen their own desire and gone astray...But among those that held fast to the commandments of God-those that remained-God established His Covenant  with Israel even until eternity, revealing [the restoration] unto them the hidden things concerning which all Israel had gone astray....But God in His wonderful mysteries [ordinances] forgave them their trespass and pardoned their sin. He built them  a sure house  [temples] in Israel, [not in Jerusalem] the like of which has not stood from ancient items and even until now. They who hold fast to it shall possess eternal life and all the glory of Adam...The Priests, the Levites , the sons of Zadok  [sons of Priesthood] who kept the charge of My sanctuary when the children of Israel strayed in their infidelity, will offer Me fat and blood ...The sons of Zadok are the elect of Israel [Latter-day Saints] those that have been called  by their name who shall be in office at the end time. [the Last Days]" Vermes p. 161)

And from a more recent translation of  Damascus Documents fragments of a Dead Sea Scroll:  "Those who remained steadfast in it [the covenant] will acquire eternal life, and all the glory of Adam is for them ... The priests and the Levites and the sons of  Zadok who maintained the service [sacrifice] of my temple when the children of Israel strayed far away from me, shall offer the fat and the blood . The priests are the converts of Israel who left the land of Judah [where did they go]; and the levites are those who joined them; and the son of Zadok are the chosen of Israel, [the Church today] those called by names who stood up at end of days." (Martinez  p. 35) Martinez had additional fragments from the Qumran Caves, including 5Q, along with those from Caves 3Q, 4Q and 6Q, (Martinez p. vii; pp. 33-71) which will be included in a future study of all the Documents.

It is most interesting, with the parallels being obvious to an LDS student of doctrine, that the Damascus Document from the Geniza and the Caves of Qumran  collate with the words of the ordination by John The Baptist on Oliver and Joseph,  and their independent accounts of the event with the expansion by Joseph as indicated,  by Section 84. It all goes together quite nicely because the events discussed and yet to be, are true. 


ALLEGRO, John M., The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Doubleday & Co., Garden City, New York, 1958

CLARK, James R., The Story of the Pearl of Great Price, Bookcraft, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah 1955

COSS, Thurman L., Secrets from the Caves, Abingdon Press, New York, 1963

DUPONT-SOMMER, A., Jewish Sect of Qumran and the Essenes, Macmillan Co., N.Y. 1956

CHARLESWORTH, James H., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha,  Doubleday & Co., Garden City, New York, 1983

GINZBERG, Louis, An Unknown Jewish Sect, Jewish Theologial Seminary of America, New York, 1970

JACKSON, Kent P., Joseph Smith's Commentary on the Bible, Deseret Book Co., Salt Lake        City, Utah 1994)

KAHLE, Paul, The Cairo Geniza, Frederick A. Praeger, New York, 1960

................... The Cairo Geniza, The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy, Kraus Reprint, Munchen, 1941, reprint 1980

LUDLOW, Daniel H., A Companion to Your Study of the Old Testament, Deseret Book, Salt Lake City, Utah 1981

MARTINEZ, F.G., The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, E. J., Brill, Leiden, 1996

McCONKIE, Bruce R., Mormon Doctrine, Bookcraft Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah 1938

MI LLER, Madeleine S., & J. Lane Miller, Harper's Bible Dictionary, Harper & Row, New York, 1973

ROBERTS, Stuart, in Sam Sokol, Universities Seek to Save Cairo Geniza Documents, Jerusalem Post, 2-21-13, Jerusalem, 2013

SCHECHTER, Solomon, A Fragment of the Original Text of Ecclesiasticus, Fifth Series, Vol. IV (July 1986)

SOKOL, Sam, Universities Seek to Save Cairo Genizah Documents, Jerusalem Post, 2.21-13, Jerusalem, 2013

STAKER, Mark L., "Commissioned of Jesus Christ": Oliver Cowdery and D&C 13, In You Shall Have My Word, Ed. Scott C. Esplin, et al., 41st Annual Brigham Young University, Sidney B. Sperry Symposium, Deseret Book Co., Salt Lake City, Utah, 2012

VERMES, Geza, Discovery in the Judean Deseret, Desclee Co., New York, 1956   

YADIN, Yigael, The Message of the Scrolls, Simon and Shuster, New York, 1957   

All research and opionions presented on this site are the sole responsibility of Dr. Einar C. Erickson, and should not be interpreted as official statements of the LDS doctrine, beliefs or practice.
To find out more about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, please see their offical websites at LDS.org and Mormon.org