After driving through east Texas for what felt like forever, I finally crossed the state border into Louisiana. Following a night in Iowa, Louisiana, the next morning, I left early to make my way towards New Orleans. Approaching the city, the highway suddenly switched from monotonous land, to suspended above water with swamp trees growing on both sides of the road. Groups of speedboats went under the highway while recreational fishers occasionally appeared on moors that seemed to come out of the swamp itself. Sometimes places live up to their reputations. But, please, don’t let that piece of faux worldliness be your main takeaway from this post.
Most people visit New Orleans for its distinctive Creole character and history. It’s a unique city that attracts people across the country and the world to spend vacations and honeymoons. If asked by a tourism board why and for how long I was visiting the city, my answers of ‘to visit the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary’ and ‘just for the morning’ would certainly be atypical and raise a few eyebrows.
Though my time in the city was brief, it was memorable for a very enjoyable visit to New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary’s Museum of the Bible and Archaeology. My experience there was very much enhanced thanks to the time of my tour guide David Justice and the willingness of Professor Jim Parker to offer me his time answering any and all questions about the collection’s origins and current use. To make one final note, the Museum of the Bible and Archaeology is only partially devoted to the display of ancient artifacts. As a result, this posting will almost entirely discuss that section of the museum rather than the museum at large.
Museum History:
The New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary (NOBTS) is one of many small American seminaries that have been longtime participants in Biblical Archaeology. Their current museum is a testament to that history, as well as to the school’s recently reinvigorated program under the aegis of the Moskau Institute of Archaeology. As early as 1917, NOBTS sent professors to Palestine to undertake geographical and archaeological research related to the Bible. As part of their travels, these professors collected archaeological artifacts, ethnographic items belonging to local peoples, and biblical manuscripts. The school’s participation in archaeology however increased considerably with the arrival of George Kelm in the late 1960s. Kelm was a Biblical Archaeologist whose work I covered in my posting about Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary’s Tandy museum. As I learned at NOBTS, Kelm’s excavations with Amihai Mazar at Timnah/Tel Batash actually started in the late 1970s when he was a professor at New Orleans. Through the school’s involvement with that excavation, they acquired several artifacts, which were displayed together with some items from the collections of earlier professors in a room in the school’s library. With the departure of Kelm, many of these items ended up dispersed, kept in campus offices, and went otherwise unused.
The impetus for the creation of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary’s museum and current archaeology program came in 2007, when the school wanted to join the consortium excavating at a site in Israel called Tel Gezer. As part of the requirements for joining such an excavation consortium in Israel, schools must have an academic program in archaeology. At the same time, the primary figure who wanted to involve the school in the Gezer project, Jim Parker became aware of the large number of archaeological artifacts on campus that were neither used nor displayed. Soon after, he began pushing for a museum to display these objects as a complement to the school’s new archaeology program. In his mind, the museum would serve as a space to display the artifacts already on campus, as well as objects that might come to the school on loan in the future as a result of their participation in archaeological projects. As Dr. Parker explained to me, he felt that if the school was going to invest in a holistic biblical archaeology program, it needed to be fully invested without cutting any corners.
As plans for the museum began to take shape, it became apparent to Parker and others that the school’s holdings from its research center focusing on New Testament manuscripts as well as other biblical manuscripts from the school’s wider collections could be lumped together with archaeological artifacts to expand the museum’s purpose from being a museum of biblical archaeology, to a museum that told the story of the Bible’s transmission through history. With the help of a few key donors, the museum opened its doors in late 2015. Today, the museum is regularly visited by seminary students as well as by local church groups. I was also informed that numerous synagogue groups had visited the museum.
In addition to its educational purpose to use objects and displays to teach about the transmission of the biblical text through time, the museum also has a faith-based mission statement. According to that statement, one of the museum’s goals is to encourage church goers and believers to study and treasure the Bible, which the statement refers to as God’s word. While the museum can be visited by anyone then, it is clear that its primary goal as one of education within the church. As a public part of the seminary, the museum can function as a small slice of seminary education for local Christians.
Artifact Origins:
With the departure of George Kelm and other professors connected to NOBTS’s former archaeology program, the exact origins of many artifacts were forgotten. For the professors involved in the school’s current archaeology program, much of what they were told about the school’s artifacts relied on oral histories rather than extensive documentation. This situation is not unique. In my own research at Oberlin College, I found that since only one professor was responsible for teaching biblical archaeology, that person alone knew where artifacts came from. In the case of NOBTS, it seems that the departure of Kelm had a catastrophic effect on the on-campus knowledge of where artifacts came from. More recently, the school has begun undertaking archival research to effectively provenance as many artifacts in their collection as possible.
Through this research and because certain objects were filed in multiple places on campus, some objects in the collection have finally been reunited with their history. The earliest identified collector of archaeological objects in NOBTS’s collection was a Baptist professor of church history named John T. Christian. Christian travelled to Palestine shortly after the First World War. While there, he collected between 25 and 30 archaeological objects including a vase and several ancient cooking pots that remain in the school’s collection. More likely than not, Christian took advantage of Mandatory Palestine’s provisions for the legal sale of antiquities in regulated shops. While the exact details of Christian’s collecting are not yet fully understood, research is underway to closely scrutinize his diary for details. Another Professor named John Wash Watts similarly took advantage of Mandatory Palestine’s antiquities laws in the 1930s, purchasing an additional small number of antiquities.
Outside of professors who donated objects, the museum, like the others I visited acts as a repository for antiquities collected by community members and a place to leave those antiquities to when community members pass away. Many religious visitors to Israel today purchase of an antiquities a souvenirs. Parker told me that he has had to turn away certain offers of antiquities because those offering them could not provide purchase documents and documents proving their authenticity. As he explained, it’s important that their museum knows where their items were bought and how they were collected. One exception to this policy however seems to be the museum’s cuneiform tablets, collected by a community member named Dr. Thomas Messer. Beyond the fact that the tablets were written in Akkadian and that Messer had travelled in Iraq, Syria, and Iran, nothing was known about their origin.
By and large the school’s collection of archaeological objects is made up of artifacts excavated by George Kelm and Amihai Mazar at Tel Batash. It seems that since New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary was part of that excavation at its start in 1977, the school was entitled to a portion of the objects discovered at the site when research concluded. This was the case even though the school was involved at Tel Batash for far fewer years than Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Under the antiquities laws that governed Israel into the late 1970s, excavating institutions would split the finds of an archaeological expedition with the state allowing for the formation of collections made up of excavated objects.
While I had encountered collections formed through partage and through antiquities purchases made by professors and individual collectors in the past, I was far more interested to learn about the museum’s use of objects loaned from the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). Prior to my visit, I hadn’t known that the Israel Antiquities Authority had a loan program for giving out objects to small museums. While I had seen material on loan from the antiquities authority at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and had heard of the large collection on loan at the Museum of the Bible in Washington D.C., I’d assumed that these were exceptional cases where objects were loaned to large institutions in the United States specifically to increase the public profile of Israel’s archaeology on a global stage. As I learned from my visit though there is in fact a formal loan system that allows for the dispersal of objects typically held in warehouses.
Dr. Parker explained that NOBTS had 13 objects on loan from the IAA. To acquire those objects, he visited one of the IAA’s large storage facilities to select objects that would complement what his school already had. After selecting these objects and demonstrating that the Museum of the Bible and Archaeology possessed the proper facilities for their storage and care, the IAA arranged for the objects to be transported to NOBTS under the supervision of an Israeli archaeologist. From there, the Israeli archaeologist observed the instillation of the objects before returning to Israel.
Thinking through the process, it dawned on me that the procedure for obtaining loaned objects must be incredibly expensive especially since the school has to pay a loan fee every few years, a fact that Dr. Parker confirmed. With this in mind, I asked Dr. Parker, ‘Why not just buy antiquities on the market like most other schools? Why all this trouble for 13 objects?’ Parker explained that while the loan process was expensive, to his mind, having objects from known archaeological contexts was far more valuable than objects from the antiquities market whose exact findspots or even sites of origin were unknown. He explained that objects with known find-spots could act as proxies for the rest of their archaeological context. From the one object, students can learn about the site it was found at, the archaeological expedition it was found by, the type of objects it was found close to, if the object was found in a house or a grave, and many other facts about the object.
For Parker then, the archaeological information provided by fully contextualized objects more than justify their costs, especially considering the comprehensive biblical archaeology program he and colleagues are trying to create at NOBTS. Parker also explained that the loaned objects form part of a larger pottery typology course taught by an Israeli scholar who visits NOBTS every couple of years, bringing diagnostic pottery sherds of his own to complement the collection of NOBTS.
The Museum and Biblical Archaeology:
The Museum of the Bible and Archaeology is on the second floor of NOBTS’s massive Hardin Student Center. Walking up the building’s stairs, the museum’s large gold lettered signage and a series of banners with pictures of archaeological objects, papyri, and codices quickly came into view. Checking my phone for the time, I realized that I was a bit early and decided to have a closer look at the museum’s edifice. The first banner one notices is of the museum’s logo, a Torah scroll laid out in what looks to resemble ancient mosaic tiles. The choice of a Torah seemed like an odd one for a museum trying to convey a multi-thousand-year history of the Bible’s transmission at a Christian institution. Thinking about its possible meaning, I concluded that the message the logo was intended to display might relate to the concept of Christian legitimacy being upheld by its deep historical roots. Continuing to the next banner, one which showed an ancient Mesopotamian tablet with the tagline, ‘the birth of literacy’ the logo began making a bit more sense. While the biblical tradition has roots that predate the canonization of the Torah in the 1st millennium BCE, earlier forms of writing, such as cuneiform, are not primarily thought of for their biblical connotations. For many then, a scroll or a Torah scroll might be a more accessible symbol for conveying the idea of religious legitimacy based on historical longevity. The museum’s edifice featured a mostly uncontextualized Iron Age jug, seemingly standing in for the idea of remote past, as well as a book with scans of papyri and a more recent Bible. This transmission history from the distant past, represented by an archaeology artifact, to the present, represented by a printed Bible, was a microcosm of the actual museum.
Turning around, I saw that my guide, David Justice had arrived. After introducing ourselves, he unlocked the museum’s double glass doors and led me down a short corridor towards a case full of antiquities. These varied widely in date from the Early Bronze Age I (c. 3700-3400 BCE) all the way to the Iron Age IIC (722-586 BCE). Looking over the labels, I noticed that few of the objects had a provided provenance, or site of origin. When I asked Dr. Parker about this during our interview later that day, I was told that these objects were likely a mix of artifacts brought to the school by professors in the first half of the 20th century and by George Kelm. Parker related that while nobody currently knew what sites these objects came from, he hoped that his research into the diaries and other archival material of earlier professors might shed some light on the object’s respective origins. As someone who was able to successfully discover the provenance of hundreds of artifacts through this very method at Oberlin, I am optimistic that some proportion of the collection’s artifacts might have their provenances restored to them.
Looking over the case, I noticed a replica of a human figurine marked as a “household idol.” On my trip, I found that some of the most interesting displays and interpretations one encounters at Biblical Archaeology museums, especially those in religious settings, relate to objects forbidden in the Bible. It just creates a certain awkwardness. Perhaps no object is more clearly forbidden than figurines/religious idols and as a result, I’ve found their display to be among the most fascinating. By contrast with the other objects, the “household idol” was not given a clear date. Asking my guide about the object, he told me that he typically uses it to discuss the little-known episode in Genesis 31 where Rachel steals the household idols of her father, Laban. Justice told me about how Rachael’s motivations for stealing her father’s idols are never explained by the biblical text and as a result, readers are left in partial confusion. He explained that an archaeological text found in Mesopotamia dating to the 2nd millennium included a law which stated that whoever possessed a family’s household idols was entitled to that family’s primary inheritance. This detail adds important context to the biblical story, filling in knowledge that ancient readers might have known, but which has been lost to modern readers. Considering this detail, the reasons for Rachael stealing the idols makes much more sense, as do Laban’s reasons for chasing after her and Jacob.
Pressing further with my questions about the display of an idol, Justice told me that, ‘the [ancient] world was filled with idols, we just have to admit to it.’ Still, it might be pertinent that the story told about idols at the museum is one that in biblical chronology is dated prior to the commandment forbidding the construction of idols. Visitors with a background in theology rather than archaeology might come away with the idea that figurines attest forms of household worship in the 2nd millennium, but that in accordance with biblical decree, such forms of worship no longer existed during the primacy of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. In reality however, the Iron Age record is replete with examples of household worship embodied by figurines, and perhaps most prominently in a class of object called Judean Pillar Figurines, which some scholars believe represent the goddess Asherah.
Turning the corner, we entered the museum proper. In the context of the museum, only one of its rooms dealt with archaeological material. My review will thus focus on that room alone Entering the space, the first thing one sees is a large circular plaque below the words, ‘the story of our Bible.’ This fascinating piece of framing automatically personalizes a museum visitor’s experience. By framing its exhibition around an ‘us’ and a visitor’s own relationship to the Bible, the museum suggests that the information it presents is indispensable to those who view the Bible as their heritage. The circular plaque itself is of interest as well. It displays a section of the Madaba Map, a mosaic floor from a Byzantine church in Madaba, Jordan. The mosaic is significant because it is the earliest known map of the Holy Land as conceptualized by the Christian faith. Thus, through both language and image, the museum suggests that both the Bible and the Holy Land are the heritage of Christians.
The archaeological display inside the museum proper consisted of three cases complemented by very helpful and informative touchscreen monitors. These touchscreens were accessible in every room of the museum, providing additional historical and contextual information for visitors with time and interest. The touchscreens also included a fun Bible history trivia game that was equally challenging, informative, and humorous with a couple of ‘throwaway’ multiple-choice answers. The wall text of the museum’s first room, its ‘Old Testament Archaeology’ section, fascinatingly begins by saying that the Bible begins with people, rather than God as one might expect. It goes on to explain that archaeology contextualizes the time periods in which Biblical figures lived and suggests that understanding that context, allows for a better understanding of biblical characters than the information provided by the Bible alone.
The first case of archaeological objects was made up of a diverse array of pottery. While most of the objects dated to either the Late Bronze Age, the supposed time of the exodus, and the Iron Age, the period of the biblical kingdoms, several of the objects in the case came from the Chalcolithic (c. 4600-3700 BCE) and Early Bronze Age (c. 3700-2500 BCE). The presentation of objects predating biblical time periods in biblical archaeology exhibitions was one of the areas that grabbed my attention most during my road trip. After all, why exhibit objects that cannot be connected to biblical characters, history, or events, when you could simply exhibit more objects from ‘relevant’ periods?
When I asked Parker about it, he explained that archaeology classes at NOBTS incorporate those earlier periods. More than likely, this is because NOBTS is trying to emulate the Israeli model of archaeological education with a particular focus on pottery typology, the study of how the shapes of ceramics changed over time. In Israel, Biblical Archaeology has a different connotation than it does in the United States. For historical reasons, Israeli Biblical Archaeology was always built on secular ideological/Zionist grounds, far more than religious grounds like American biblical archaeology. While the American biblical archaeology focuses on a narrower range of periods that might correlate to the bible’s context, Israeli biblical archaeology has come to encompass the study of the Levant from the agricultural revolution in the Neolithic period, up until the Hellenistic period. The traditional American biblical archaeology has been the receipt of criticism for its narrow approach, so, by co-opting the Israeli model, the school can continue teaching biblical archaeology in the American sense, with religious connotations, while retaining the sense of respect afforded to Israeli archaeological method. In other words, it demonstrates that the school’s archaeology program is a serious one.
The next case of artifacts was the standard biblical archaeology museum display of seriated lamps. Both because they are easy to acquire on the antiquities market and because they easily show changing pottery styles over time, lamps are ubiquitous in such museums. NOBTS’s museum included a selection dating from the Late Bronze Age (c. 1500-1200 BCE) to the Byzantine/Early Islamic Period (c. 5th century CE). Justice explained that while he mentions the archaeological use of the lamps, his favorite way of presenting the case is by using it to tell a story from the New Testament, the Parable of the Ten Virgins from the Gospel of Matthew. Lamps and their oil are at the center of the story serving as a metaphor for the need for Christians to constantly be ready for Christ’s return. Pairing the story together with physical objects serves to reinforce its point by making the parable more tangible and thus, evocative. By placing the lamp and other objects into one’s imagining of the parable, the story and its lesson might become stronger. As Justice explained, ‘physical objects can help us to fill the stories of the Bible. It gives readers a piece of the actual context of the Bible rather than just our own.’
The final display of archaeological objects in the case was a group of ceramic fragments from Tel Gezer, the site NOBTS had helped excavate for several years. The sherds were not used to discuss ceramic dating as they commonly are in these exhibits, but rather served to illustrate the school’s contemporary participation in an archaeological project. Asking again about the school’s connection with Gezer, I learned that part of the reason the school had been interested in participating in that project was because it would, in time, lead to more opportunities to acquire artifacts on loan from the Israel antiquities authority. Dr. Parker told me that through loans of objects from Gezer, he hoped to bring less common material to the museum including scarab beads/seals and metal objects.
The rest of my visit was equally enjoyable but exceeds the mandate I’ve set out for my blog. The rooms about the transmission of the Bible from Hebrew to Greek and from Greek to Latin were particularly impressive, and I would recommend a full visit to anyone with some extra time and interest in New Orleans.
Conclusion: Israeli Archaeology, Legitimacy, and Apologetics
Religiously motivated ‘Biblical Archaeology’ was the foundational paradigm for the archaeology of Palestine. In its heyday, its center was in American seminaries where affiliated professors and students led the way in ceramic studies, the creation of typologies, the excavation of sites, and the formation of numerous museum collections. This iteration of Biblical Archaeology was concerned with cutting edge methodology but was equally devoted to using its finds in order to legitimate the Bible’s core events, characters, and history. The presumptions of historicity assumed by otherwise competent archaeologists led to a collapse in the field’s reputation. Biblical Archaeologists, especially religious ones were to be considered biblical scholars rather than serious archaeologists. At the same time as the American biblical archaeology was regressing, Israeli archaeology increasingly took off. Internationally respected, Israeli excavations retained a certain sense of legitimacy, especially in the Christian community, that the American Biblical Archaeology had seemingly lost.
The relationship today between American Biblical Archaeology and Israeli is mutually beneficial. By having religious institutions participate in Israeli archaeology, Israeli excavations recruit enthusiastic excavators who come to the country with money and motivation. Equally, the interest of American institutions in acquiring artifacts on loan from the Israel antiquities authority presents another opportunity for generating income from a group of objects that would otherwise remain in storage. While certainly an expensive undertaking, there are numerous benefits for American institutions. By participating in an Israeli project, American Biblical archaeology can appropriate the legitimacy of Israeli archaeology. As I see it, the pottery class taught at NOBTS is a further appropriation of that legitimacy. Israeli scholars spend a year learning to date pottery, therefore, for NOBTS’s students to be “good” (read Israeli style) archaeologists, they must take a pottery course.
The greatest benefit for American institutions however is related to their continued interest in Christian apologetics, or the defense of the Bible’s historical legitimacy. By appropriating the secular and respected Israeli archaeological methodology, once back in the United States, using that sense of legitimacy, Christian institutions like NOBTS can use archaeology as a powerful form of Christian apologetic, one insulated from the original criticisms of American biblical archaeology. As Dr. Parker explained to me during their interview, ‘New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary certainly appreciates archaeology, but that archaeology forms only a part of the primary religious mission [we’re here] to promote.’
Comments