Few people among us who are seriously interested in the life of the mind are actually professional teachers; few professional teachers teach at colleges or universities; few college or university teachers are at research universities (a big difference from, say, liberal arts colleges — not better or worse, just very different); and not all instructors at research universities direct PhD Dissertations. Those of us who do usually find it to be a sacred obligation (it is the final step for a graduate student to her PhD), an honor, a privilege, and an ungodly amount of work.
When I first published this series on what it is research scholars in academic position actually *do*, directing it was the first thing. That was because at that precise moment I was deeply entrenched in reading a dissertation. Here’s what I said.
******************************
I have just now been traveling across country (I’m currently in an airline lounge in Chicago) and on the plane I have been reading a (very fine) doctoral dissertation, whose author will be “defending” (that is, being subject to interrogation by the five faculty members on her committee) tomorrow.
It’s a very good dissertation, I think. Like all dissertations it is book-length (will be turned into a published monograph, I should think), highly technical in places, very learned, the result of something like three years of full time labor. This particular student is not one that I am directing (each student has one faculty member directly responsible for supervision of the dissertation); I am just one of the other committee members.
One of the things I like best about being a research scholar at a major university is that the dissertations are works that I can learn from – sometimes a whole lot. They are written at the very end of a PhD candidate’s work as the culmination of their entire education, and these advanced graduate students are experts in the fields that they address. This particular thesis is a case in point: the author is dealing with twenty-four Jewish inscriptions (both funerary and dedicatory), roughly from the fourth to fifth Christian centuries, which identify Jewish women, specifically, with titles that indicate they were, in some sense, leaders in their Jewish communities. The big issue really is BIG. Did Jewish women have positions of authority in running the show in synagogues in the Roman world?
This particular analysis is highly sophisticated. The author applies a
post-structuralist analysis to these inscriptions, arguing that while it may be impossible to get back to the historical realities of the situation on the ground, we can see at least how those realities came to be embodied in these inscribed texts. The question: how were women represented in these inscriptions (so that the representations made good sense to their original readers)? She also applies a feminist critique of the study of power and argues that our concern over who actually was involved in governance may say more about what we are interested in today than what women (and others) may have been interested in in antiquity.
The scholar who has produced this work is principally an archaeologist, and the study is using archaeological findings (in this case inscriptions) to help us understand better the Jewish world of antiquity. It is fascinating and heavy-hitting stuff.
As I said, I am simply a committee member in this instance. I am myself directing a half dozen other dissertations right now, dealing not so much with ancient Judaism as with ancient Christianity, my own area of expertise. Just to give you a sense of the kind of breadth that my students cover, I can give a list of what these dissertations are:
- A full examination of the history of the Greek manuscripts of Paul’s letter to the Galatians, showing how scribes altered their texts of Galatians over the centuries, sometimes in significant ways, and utilizing a method known as “cladistics” to establish a plausible relationship of all the surviving manuscripts to one another. This student just defended his dissertation (I co-directed it; he is in the PhD program not at UNC but at nearby Duke) and it’s pretty amazing.
- A study of the language of “martyrdom” in selected Gnostic and proto-orthodox texts of the second and third centuries, showing that traditional claims that Gnostics spurned martyrdom and proto-orthodox Christians embraced it are highly problematic and unnuanced.
- A study of the form of Mark’s Gospel that was available to the author of Matthew. The idea here is that Matthew used Mark for many of his stories about Jesus; but Mark was in different forms, depending on which copy an ancient writer was looking at. This student wants to figure out the ways in which Matthew’s copy of Mark differed from the form of Mark that we are familiar with today.
- A study of the so-called Testimonium Flavianum – the testimony of Josephus to Jesus as found in Book 18 of his Antiquities of the Jews, a testimony of real importance to the question of whether Jesus actually existed, as mythicists love to tell us! This author is no mythicist (he is another Duke student; and I am not directing the dissertation, but am just on the committee), but he does think that the passage in question was not written by Josephus, but by none other than Eusebius, the Christian Father of Church History, and that it was inserted into Josephus’s writings by one wanting to show that this famous Jewish historian knew about the existence of Jesus.
- A study of Paul’s mission to convert the Gentiles that is rooted in the idea that the so-called “northern tribes” of Israel were not, in fact, destroyed (in Paul’s mind; we’re not talking about historical reality here) by the Assyrians in the 8th century BCE, but that “Israel” (the northern 10 tribes) intermarried with non-Israelites, so that if “all Israel must be saved,” as Paul claims in the letter to the Romans, it means that Gentiles have to accept Jesus as messiah. This, the author is claiming, is why Paul was so intent on converting the non-Jews.
- A study of the traditions/legends surrounding Jesus post-resurrection appearances in authors of the second and third Christian centuries, in light of what we know about visions and visionary experiences from Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources of the early centuries CE, with a special emphasis on such texts as the Gospel of Peter.
- A study (finished last year) of a group of texts known as the Books of Women, written in ancient Syriac, by fifth century (and later) Christians who in them described the lives of some of the important women of the Old Testament (Esther, Ruth, Susanna, etc.) but ending, not with Scriptural stories, but with the one-time famous “Thecla,” traditionally thought to have been a female convert of the apostle Paul, and who was celebrated and adored in parts of the early Christian church. Why was Thecla included in a selection of summaries of the lives of famous Israelite women? A great question – and the one that the dissertation worked to answer! I co-directed this interesting study with a colleague at Duke, even though the student was at UNC, since he is one of the world’s experts on ancient Syriac)
Obviously these dissertations (I’ve mentioned only the ones I’m working with over the past year or so; I’ve been doing this for 23 years now) cover an enormous range of intellectual inquiry. One of the reasons I love teaching PhD students is that it forces me to learn all sorts of things that I never would have thought to learn much about on my own. I have to do so if I’m to supervise all this work. Doing so has made the most enormous difference in my own intellectual life, and has opened up innumerable doors for me, as I get interested in a much wider assortment of things than if I were teaching in some other kind of environment. Still, it’s a boatload of work! But it’s no more work than so many other people do in so many other fields. There are only 24 hours in the day for each of us, and many of us figure out ways to fill just about all of them, whatever we do for a living.
So you are on PhD committees at Duke and vice-versa? Sort of share the wealth.
Yup! That makes both programs stronger — we share faculty, students, and resoources. Not many programs can match that combined strength.
I believe you’ve said that when you were an Evangelical you (thought you) had a personal relationship with Jesus. What was that like and what did it consist of? Prayer? Listening to Jesus? Thinking about whether Jesus approves of your behavior? Readiness to be thankful?
And/or what are some of the specifics being referred to when Evangelicals/Fundamentalists say they have a personal relationship with Jesus?
Yup, yup, yup, and yup. ANd lots of devotional Bible reading, prayer groups, witnessing (to family, friends, and people on the street!). But mainly it was a personal one-on-one relationship with Jesus and God, a constant consciousness of them in my life and my life in relation to them.
If you were a Jehovah’s Witness, you would have done more witnessing and less personal reflection!
I think I already tried to ask this question but must have forgotten to actually post it since now I can’t find it.
I’m interested in what Jesus said about how people should live in order to experience a “foretaste” of God’s kingdom in the here and now of their lives. He says a lot about how people should live in order to someday “be admitted” to the kingdom. And he’s probably implying that the same thing will also give them a foretaste of the kingdom.
But I have trouble finding gospel passages where he explicitly relates the ethics he teaches to experiencing a foretaste—as opposed to gaining admittance. I suppose I’m looking for something like what Jesus says in Luke about “the kingdom of God being among you” that “also” explicitly talks about the ethics that need to be practiced in order for the kingdom to be experienced in the here and now. (Although I believe that you say that in this passage of Luke Jesus is referring to himself as the presence of the kingdom.)
Maybe there is something like this in John — but John usually talks about belief rather than ethics.
I think something like the parable of the mustard seed is like that. A small group begins to live the ethics of the kingdom and soon it will take over.
What happens if the doctoral student fails to successfully defend her dissertation? Does she get some type of second chance?
Yup, one second chance. After that it’s over. That rarely happens since normally an advisor won’t let the dissertation come to the defense unless she/he thinks it is good enough.
This is probably a silly and massively under-informed observation, but it occurs to me that since (as you say) these PhD candidates are already experts – probably THE experts – in the subject of their dissertation, why should supervision or dissertation committees even be necessary for them to be granted their final credential? One assumes that by that point in their academic careers, they wouldn’t just be quoting Dr. Seuss on each page of their dissertations.
Well, they are *supposed* to be experts. 🙂 The committee is made of experienced scholars with deep expertise in one or another *aspect* of the dissertation, deeper expertise on that *part* of it than the student will have. No one will have written a book on this precise topic with this precise approach, but everyone will have deep(er) knowledge about aspects of it, and together they can figure out if it hangs together and works.
Off topic…… Where can I access ‘How Scholars Read the Bible” series? They are not listed on https://www.bartehrman.com/courses/
THe courses In the Beginning and The Unknown Gospels are the first two installments in the series. The series will cover all the books of the Bible (I think), one chunk at a time. The next one will be called “Finding Moses,” dealing with the rest of the Pentateuch. We haven’t announced it yet, but it will be in November.
This is fascinating. I would love to hear more on how you evaluate a dissertation on a subject where are you have a strong background but you have not pursued the topic to a great deal of depth. I presume the student will propose a hypothesis, layout the evidence referring to research and other authorities, and then come to a conclusion. After following the students line of thought and reviewing the supporting evidence, what if you come to a different conclusion? For example, what if you have a different conclusion about the relevance of Thecla, after reviewing the evidence provided. Do you conclude that the dissertation was not successful?
I don’t think I”ve ever served on a disssertation committee where every member of the committee agreed with the thesis of the dissertation. We look to make sure that the student has read and mastered all teh scholarship, proposed a viable thesis, backed it up with rigorous data and argument, not made mistakes, written it compellingingly, etc. So it’s not a matter of agreeing, but of agreeing that it is serious, responsible, and important scholarship. If the committee members think the thesis simply isn’t plausible or sufficiently argued/defencded, then it really is a problem for the student.
“A study of the form of Mark’s Gospel that was available to the author of Matthew. ”
Any chance at getting access to this?
Well, it wuld have been if the student ever completed the project. But alas, he withdrew from the program. It happens…
I’m thinking of doing a thesis within the next couple of years. Maybe for Master of Education!
I understand that Paul and the historical Jesus had somewhat different ideas about how salvation worked. I also understand that at least some important differences did not originate with Paul but with Jesus’s immediate post-resurrection followers.
My question is which if any of the more important differences probably originated with Paul?
The most important was that followers of Jesus did not need to be Jews and follow the prescriptipons of Jewish law that were designed to make Jews a distinctive people (circumcision, sabbath observance, kosher, etc.)
How does the Hebrew Bible describe the “Kingdom of God” that Jesus preached?
What are some of the principal citations? I skimmed through Isaiah the other day and found quite a few of what I thought were likely candidates.
Are terms other than kingdom of god used?
I think a key element is the notion of God’s kingship. But I’m more interested in the results of that kingship.
Every author has to be read and studied for any key term like this. For some Jewish authors, God’s kingdom means his rule now over people; or his sovereignty over the world; or his rule among his followrs. After the Hebrew Bible period a view developed that it refers to a future actual kingdom on earth that will be ruled by God’s messiah.
Is the “study of the form of Mark’s Gospel that was available to the author of Matthew” published yet? I’d be really interested in reading it.
Also, how often do you meet up with those you supervise? At the University of Manchester, we typically see our supervisors once a month.
1. The student never finished it! Withdrew from the program; 2. We don’t have a set amount of time. Some students need/want to meet more frequently, others less, and so we tailor it to individual needs/programs.
I guess the agape between Duke and North Caroline is paused for the basket ball games.😊 When my son studied at Duke he had a T-shirt that said ” Go to Hell Carolina”.
But seriously, what a fascinating array of themes, and indeed, what a demanding task to supervise or examine these theses.
But you must admit, Bart, that it has kept you young and exercised your brain to olympic levels.
I would be curious to read the thesis about the Jewish women inscriptions. Or at least to know what the texts say. Is it published, then? What’s the title of the thesis?
My memories about women leaders begin with the biblical matriarchs, particularly Sarah ,Rebecca, and Leah , who surely run their own families with stilettos. They could be deadly ( Sarah with Hagar, Rebecca with Esau, Leah with Rachel).The tradition of tough Jewish wives and mothers resounds to this day in known stereotypes, the domineering wife and the Jewish mother.
Yup, same t-shirt over here, reversed. ANd yup, having graduate students has made all the difference in my career and scholarship. Not to mention how much it’s helped with my boyish figure and stunning good looks.
😂
“an honor, a privilege, and an ungodly amount of work”
This made me laugh out loud. I do envy you exactly one (good) dissertation direction every two years. That would be an extremely rewarding and interesting role.
Anything past that and I am thrilled I never got a job at a research university.
Yeah, if you don’t thrive on it, you’d be crazy to do it.