The third part of the comprehensive exam is done. It was a week-long take-home question. I went a little overboard and answered it in 9,400 words with about 30 sources; in other words, I wrote what amounts to a light article draft. Hopefully, some of it can be used as a dissertation proposal.
About the first 2,500 is a translation of Luke 1:1-4, which required a trip to Harding’s library. Let’s just say they have a lot more commentaries on Luke than the UofM’s – so many that I nearly freaked out looking at them. I ended up choosing the seminal one (Cadbury), Anchor’s (Fitzmyer), a recent one (Bovon) and of course I already had Goulder’s cranky one. I would have used more – the format makes for some interesting rambling and discussion of Greek grammar and syntax, but most of the other ones I flipped through were conservative seminary work with very, very different concerns.
I was pleasantly surprised, though, when I sprang up from the floor to turn and walk back to the copier, to face the commentaries on Matthew, and out of the hundreds there, my eyes immediately fell on Goulder’s MLM, even though it was in a different edition than mine. Libraries are full of happy accidents, and they’re probably why I do this.