The PhD comprehensive exams for HB/NWS students consist of four sections: (1) Hebrew and Northwest Semitic languages; (2) biblical criticism; (3) Syro-Pal history; and (4) a minor language of study (mine is Akkadian). For the biblical criticism and Syro-Pal sections, I’ve curated a list of topics about which the examinee should be expected to write a short essay. This list is by no means comprehensive (how can it be when the exam tests our mastery of hundreds of years of material?), but it can serve as a starting point to review the fundamentals. For each of these, we should know–at a minimum–the broad outlines of each topic in the history of scholarship (key figures and arguments) as well as our own approach to this topic. Similarly, for the periods of history, know the major outline as well as key events, including its significance for biblical studies. It is advised that the examinee find overview articles and history of scholarship articles on these topics, such as are available on Oxford Bibliographies or encyclopedia entries.
Dietary Law (function)
What is the purpose of biblical dietary laws? Some have suggested that ancient Israelites knew about the health concerns of consuming undercooked pork or raw seafood and thus forbade them. Others have suggested the rationale is primarily economic: goats are cheaper and produce more than pigs. These seem unconvincing. A third option is sociological, rooted in identity marking: Canaanites sacrificed pigs; thus, Israelites don’t eat pig to ensure that they are not affiliated with Canaanite practices (anti-Baalistic syncretism). Better, but the problem is that Canaanites also sacrificed sheep, goats, etc., making the rationale illogical. Early Jewish interpreters tried allegory: don’t act like a pig by eating pig (modern version: you are what you eat). This seems weak. A final option, suggested by Mary Douglas, is about categories of holiness, which she defines as the conformity to one’s particular and appropriate categories–i.e, the right place and order of things. Note that the biblical laws provide categories. Permissible animals are those which chew the cud and have split hooves. For water animals, any type that fits a particular category is permissible: it swims in the water and has fins and scales (which excludes shellfish like clams and lobsters). This focus on preventing “category confusion” also makes sense of other laws, such as not wearing garments of mixed linen and wool, or not planting two different crops in the same field, or men wearing women’s clothing, etc. Everything needs to be in its appropriate place. While the origins of the categories themselves are not always explained and can even seem arbitrary (i.e., why fish and not lobster?), categories are usually culturally specific and don’t need to make sense from the outsider’s perspective (i.e., why do we overindulge on candy at Halloween? Or why eat eggs on Easter despite the fact that bunnies don’t even lay eggs? We just do; these are appropriate categories for American culture).