ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 632 / C&RL News Widening access to th e D ead Sea Scrolls B y W illia m A . M o f fe t t Director H untington Library T he purpose o f America’s great research libraries is to support the p ursuit of truth: not m erely to collect and preserve informatio to make it accessible to those who want it, and to do so in as free and un fe ttere d a way as we can. Nothing could be m ore an­ tithetical to th at mission than the conduct o f those who have controlled access to the D ead Sea Scrolls for the past forty years. T he H untington Library’s traditional independence and unusual resources enabled it to play a sudden and decisive role in bringing the long and sorry saga of secrecy and exclusivity to an end— to commit what The N ew York Times would call “a just and valuable act,” what an O m aha editor described as “hitting a hom e run for intellectual freedom .” In undertaking to stand up to the Scrolls cartel, we knew we ran some considerable risks, and those who W illiam A have hailed the step we took said it required courage. But given the com ­ m itm ent m ade to the donor who gave us th e photo­ graphs o f the scrolls, given the clear policy o f open access established long ago by the trustees, and given th eir resolute com m itm ent to principle, we really had no o ther choice. In the end we simply reaffirm ed our basic mission, our reason for being here. At one tim e it was n ot uncom m on for research libraries, including the H untington, to restrict ac­ cess to research materials, especially original m ate­ rials, and to grant exclusive perm ission to a single scholar to edit or publish such materials. To justify such restrictions it was h eld that granting o f exclu­ sive permission avoided duplication of effort in identical projects and ten d e d to assure th at only qualified individuals undertook editorial tasks. Such thinking underlay the set o f regulations laid down in 1938 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College for the use of H arvard’s archives and of o ther m anuscripts in all branches o f th e university, and which for a long tim e was held up as a m odel for o th er repositories. n, b uOtn e o f the adm itted drawbacks was that the practice often delayed the appearance o f materials in print, and discouraged legitimate scholars from undertaking im por­ tant projects. Indeed, some scholars staked out claims to m anuscripts which w ere never developed. T hirty years ago American r e ­ search libraries began adopting a far m ore open approach. Exclusive ac­ cess became the exception. The trust­ ees of the Folger Shakespeare Li­ brary, for example, passed a resolu­ tion declaring all its holdings to be in Photo the public domain and freely avail­ able to any scholar requiring their use. As director Louis B. W right p ut credit: it: “W e make no effort to protect anybody’s [exclusive] right to edit a Star News docum ent. In my opinion that is the way it ought to be. I have never . M offett be lie v ed th a t a re sea rc h library should undertake to police its docu­ ments. Any such effort leads inevitably to trouble. F urtherm ore, I d o ubt w hether a tax exem pt institu­ tion could support any policy of exclusion if the case w ere ever taken to court. Some o f the universities which try to preserve docum ents for the use o f their graduate students are in constant hot w ater and have m ade many enem ies.. ..I advise com plete free­ dom of access.” [L etterto H e rb e rt Schulz, April 20, 1967.] By that tim e th e H untington Library had already w idened access to its holdings, and in 1967 its trustees officially established a far-reaching policy totally eliminating restrictive practices in the study, publication, and reproduction of its rare books, manuscripts, and art objects, except in cases w here the term s o f a gift lim ited the use of the material, or “for o th er compelling cause.” [M inutes of meeting, August 18, 1967.1 (Cont. on page 634) 634 / C&RL News (Henderson c o n t.fro m previous page) alike. It is behavior, as we have read, which “(al­ though legal) should be avoided.” W hat mechanisms can the library profession employ to persuade an institution to behave differ­ ently? T he H untington Library has offered one example. W hat, beyond heightened public aware­ ness and pressure, has been gained? T he H unting­ ton Library has released only photographic rep ro ­ ductions o f the D ead Sea Scrolls. T he increased availability of the reproductions does not obviate the need for scholars to have access to the originals because what is being produced, albeit on a sched­ ule unsatisfactory to nearly all, is a scholarly edition o f a text. E ditors of texts n eed access to the originals o f surviving manuscripts if their edition is to have authority. Running around the Israeli Antiquities Authority, the Rockefeller M useum in Jerusalem, and the scholars privileged to work with the original D ead Sea Scrolls may, in fact, be one way to jum p the hurdles they have erected, but it may not help attain the ultim ate goal o f having democratic access to the original scrolls. The controlling parties need to be convinced that their m ethods are not condu­ cive to even the chosen editors producing an au­ thoritative text because they stifle the free flow of scholarly inquiry and discourse; b ut that may re ­ q uire persuasion o f a d ifferent sort than the H untington’s bold move. ■ ■ (Moffett cont. fr o m page 632) That policy has been consistently applied in succeeding years to the thousands o f scholars who have drawn on the H untington’s fabled resources, as well as commercial and educational enterprises that have used its materials. It is that same principle which is em bedded in ACRL’s and the Society of American Archivists’ 1979 “Joint Statem ent on Access to Original Re­ search Materials:” “A repository should not deny access to materials to any person or persons, nor grant privileged or exclusive use of materials to any person or person, nor conceal the existence of any body of material from any researcher, unless required to do so by law, donor, or purchase stipulations.” Am I wrong in thinking that most o f us simply accept that statem ent as a commonplace? Do any of us still contend with restrictions that mimic the D ead Sea Scrolls scandal? I sincerely hope not. But should any librarian or archivist find himself or herself in the position we found ourselves in at the H untington this year, I trust that person will take heart from ou r experience. Be resolute! Take arms against even a sea o f troubles— and by opposing, e nd them . ■ ■ (Scrolls cont. fr o m page 631) ted, access will be dependent solely on the availabil­ ity o f study space and the num ber of o th er readers seeking access to the same materials. Use during some periods of the year is predictably very heavy, especially in the sum m er months. “In the case of the scrolls archive, the reader will initially be expected to work from images on micro­ film. In most cases it will not be necessary to go directly to the m aster negatives. “I f a person wishes to review the library’s scrolls holdings at a distance, he or she can arrange to examine the microfilm set by asking his or her institutional library to secure it from the H unting­ ton on ordinary interlibrary loan. (According to the library’s customary practice th ere may be a modest charge to offset costs of copying, postage, and handling, but the H untington does not propose to charge a fee for access.)” W h at is t h e c u r r e n t s ta te o f e v e n ts ? “I think it [the controversy] is over for us,” com m ented Moffett. “T he action should shift to the scholars.” W hen asked if he’s heard from the Israeli Antiquities Authority, Moffett replied th at he’s re­ ceived an invitation from Emm anuel Tov of the H ebrew University in Jerusalem to attend a confer­ ence, tentatively scheduled for D ecem ber 1991, to discuss the issues surrounding the scrolls. Autho­ rized scholars and representatives o f those institu­ tions holding images o f the scrolls are invited to attend. “T he invitation is u nder consideration,” said Moffett, who reported that the “response to the H untington Library has been overwhelming. N ot a single negative com m ent has come in. I t’s been a remarkable event to be involved in.”—M ary Ellen K. Daυis, editor and publisher, C&RL News ■ ■