Earliest Christian History: AAR/SBL split
Earliest Christian History picks up on April DeConick’s recent discussion of the AAR (American Academy of Religion)/SBL (Society of Biblical Literature) split. When I was at Harvard, this was quite the hot topic since, as I understand it, Harvard Divinity School Professor Robert Orsi was instrumental in this change. Of course, as a Master student, I was even less “in the loop” than PhD/ThD students like Brent Landau (how’s it going, Brent?). So, I could be wrong or misinformed on that.
However, I can say that plenty of professors in the area of New Testament Studies are a bit annoyed with the split. And I am aware of several who have resigned their AAR memberships because they have no intention of attending two conferences every year.
My personal opinion is that this is a bad move on the part of the AAR. I am assuming that they felt swallowed by the massive SBL, and that they plan to assert their identity. It remains to be seen what the AAR will look like without a huge chunk of their constituency.
All-in-all, the study of religion really ought to be a collaborative effort. So many academics complain about colleagues unwilling to work together. The SBL/AAR seemed like a golden opportunity to bridge the gap between different disciplines within the field. Of course, it also seemed like a great excuse to party!
Hello Stephen,
I just discovered your blog yesterday, but have been enjoying it. I just have a small note on this post. You say “I am assuming that they felt swallowed by the massive SBL.” Not that I am “in the loop” to interpret things, but my understanding is that the AAR is bigger than the SBL. On their latest reports it says that the AAR had 10,340 in 2005, while SBL had 7,814 as of November 2006 (up from 7,092 twelve months prior). So SBL is between 25-30% smaller than the AAR.
I’m no fan of the split, but I don’t think they feel swallowed… given the numbers. Unless they were feeling swallowed irrationally, which I guess is a possibility.
Peace,
Pat
Hey Pat,
You raise an excellent point. I wasn’t thinking about raw numbers, but was thinking about the fact that the vast majority of biblical scholars belong to both SBL and AAR. Based on conversations with some folks, I was led to believe that these numbers may change this year, as a lot of people will be choosing either SBL or AAR (rather than both). Of course, I could be totally wrong. Thanks for pointing out those numbers.
-stephen
The Forbidden Gospels Blog: Post from Matthew Collins about Future of SBL
April DeConick was able to get a statement from Matthew Collins on this SBL/AAR split. An interesting read. I love anyone that “exegetes” press releases!
That’s a good point, Stephen. I myself am among the double membership crowd and didn’t think about how that might inflate the numbers on the AAR side (though there may be the possibility that some will choose AAR over the SBL for their single membership). A lot of the biblical scholars that I know, however, are not actually dual members. I’m just doing it while I’m a student, to get the lay of the land. Anyhoo, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see how it all shakes down.
BTW, I agree. That statement from Matthew Collins was good reading.
Peace,
Pat
Gotta love Matthew Collins.