Well, first of all, first of all, how did how did the prayers emerge? And when did they emerge? Right basic, basic question, but actually one about which there is still a lot of dispute. So literally on one foot, the traditional understanding was pretty much that these prayers, some of them were, I mean, the, the Talmud says, some of them were written by the Avot, by the patriarchs, and some come after that Babylonian exile by the Men of the Great Assembly. There's no basis for that in anything that we can document. And certainly what we have now from the Dead Sea Scrolls shows that while people were certainly praying, and we have that also from the Bible, and from extra bit of extra biblical books, the texts that we think of now, the structures that we think of now for prayer didn't exist. What was happening with the academic study of liturgy, starting over 100 years ago, now, maybe close to 125 years ago now. And actually, in some ways, going back to Leopold Zunz in 1832, was that there were scholars who were trying to say, Okay, we have this variety of prayer texts out there. We have the Ashkenazi, right, we have this Sefardi, right, we have the Italian, right? There's actually many more rights than that. And can we look at what we know, and figure out what the original composed text was? Who wrote down what initially. And that's the way we tend to think about prayers. In fact, if I were to write a prayer today, it would be, it would get my name attached to it, probably, hopefully, at least initially. And it would be something that I wrote, and it would have an integrity as something that I wrote. Well, we know that that if there was an initial composition like that, it didn't maintain its integrity, and it got passed down. There's been, I'm not going to go through the whole history of scholarship, because I think that's probably more than you want, unless you want me to do it. But there's been scholars who said well, Joseph Heinemann was the biggie the 19, 1964, his dissertation, published in Hebrew in 1964, in English in '72, or three, basically said, well, there were different contexts in the late Second Temple period in which people were composing prayers, each with different kinds of formal characteristics. Like, prayers of the synagogue are always voiced in the plural, that people in the plural. And they address G?d as You. Prayers of the Beit Midrash speak about G?d in the third person. So the study hall prayers, He would talk about. Then there was some from the Temple and some from in prayers of the individual would be voiced in the first person singular. And there are different kinds of formulaic things that he would, he identified them. Unfortunately, that doesn't all hold up. And there's also no evidence for this subdivision of things sort of looking back from later liturgies. So in 1989, Ezra Fleischer, also pf blessed memory, all of these folks are no longer with us, published a really seminal article, which he says, Nope, this destruction of the Temple, caused the construction of the liturgy. And so everything happens after 70. Everything begins at Yavneh, among the rabbis gathered, probably under Rabban Gamaliel. So the second generation of Yavneh, not the immediate destruction, but descent, decade, two decades, maybe three decades later, and they compose the prayers as the Talmud records, and sent, got, and then sent, promulgated it. I always used to joke that the fax machine theory of Jewish liturgy, because I didn't hear that I don't really agree with that. Fax machines are not the way to do it. It would be a blog post theory, I don't know something like that. The truth of the matter is my theory, my understanding of it, is that Fleischer's right in that the destruction of the Temple is a determinative moment. But he's not right in seeing complete discontinuity for everything that was going before. But, and where he's also not right is in his taking rabbis' descriptions of their own authority as actual history. If I'm going to write my own history, I'm going to be at the center and I'm going to make myself much more important, right.