Between Text and Artifact: Integrating Archaeology in Biblical Studies Teaching (Archaeology and Biblical Studies)

22 BElWEENTEXTANDARllFAcr

Israel within its biblical and Near Eastern context ancl thebeliefthat
archaeology can write a hisLOry of ancient Israel. Chronologically, it
includesthearchaeologyofthelandoftheBibleduringperiodsoftime
thataredirectlyorindirectlyrelatedtotheHebrewBible(EarlyBronze
throughIronAges;ca.300o-sixthcenturyB.C.E.).JdefineSyro-Palestinian
archaeologyasthearchaeologyofSyria,Israel,Jordan,andPalestinefrom
thePaleolithicthroughtheOllomanperiods,thusalsoincludingbiblical
archaeology.3l

"SYRO-PALESllNIANARCHAEOl.OGY"ANDITS

IMPACTONBIBLICAL511JDIESANDCURRICULA

Paralleltodevelopmentsandnewchallengesfacingbiblicalstudies,a
similarintellectualanddisciplinarysplitoccurredin thearchaeological
worldinthe]960sand1970s. Duringthefirsthalfofthetwentiethcen-
tury, archaeologywasoftendefinedasthe "handmaidenofhistory"or
whatissometimesreferredtoas"culturehistory"(i.e.,lhemappingof
culturesandculturalinfluencesasa toolinreconstructingthe past).As
archaeologybecamemorecloselyaffiliatedwithanthropology,newmeth-
odsandtheorieschallengedpreviousculture-historyapproaches.These
include "New Archaeology" (or processual archaeology in its mature
sr~lgf")and,morerecently,posrprncessu::l]::lrchaeology.Somewhatbelat-
edlythesedevelopmentsinfluencedbiblicalarchaeology.Theimpactof
thesenewideasonbiblicalarchaeologywasbestexemplifiedinDever's
term"Syro-Palestinian"archaeologyaspartofhiseffortsto promotea
moresystematicandscientific professional "biblicalarchaeology" that
encouragedclosertiestothelargerworldofananthropologicallybased
archaeology.32However,thesealtemplStointegratebiblicalarchaeology
intoanthropologicalstudieshavenotsignificantlychangedhowbiblical
archaeologywasand isbeingtaughtinthe UnitedStales.In fact, asa
resultofattemptstoredefineAlbrightianbiblicalarchaeology,ilwasoften

j1 IconsiderthelermSyro-PafestillilHlan;bm..'Ofogytobeinterch;lllgc:lblewiththeterms
an;baeologyofthe{midoftheBible,an;bacofogyofIIX!Holy/.ill/d,:tndarcbaeologyoftbe
Levant.Itis myopinionlll:llarchaeologyoftheLevantisprobablyIhemOSInculnllandpre-
ferreddesignationofthearch;lCologyofthelandofIsraelanditsneighooringcounlries;how-
ever,ilisprobablyalemllhalwillgeneralelillieWidespreadsludenlorpublicinterest.
32 ForhismOSIre<:entcomments,seeWilliamG.Dever,"Imp:lCtofthe'NewArchaeol-
ogy:inDrinkard,Mallhingly,andMiller,Benchmarksill"fi"melmdClllture,337-52;idem,
"Syro-I'alestinianandBiblicalArchal.-ology,"inKnighlandTucker,tbeHebnfwBiblealld/Is
ModernITllC1preters,31-74;idem,"BiblicalArchaeology,"1:315-19andbibliographythere.
Seealso[a1wrenceE.Toombs,"APerspectiveonlheNewArchaeology,"inPerdue,'IOomb~,
andJohnson,Arc/)a(.'OlogylIlIdIJiblicafIlIterpre/atiOlI,41-52.