1 Francis Greenwood Peabody, “The Call to Theology,” HTR 1 (1908) 1.

2 “The Protestant Missionary Propaganda in India,” J. P. Jones (1915); “The Modern Missionary,” James L. Barton (1915); “The Bible in Persian Translation: A Contribution to the History of Bible Translations in Persia and India,” Walter J. Fischel (1952).

3 “The Category of Growth in Comparative Religion: A Critical Self-Examination,” Raimundo Panikkar (1973); “The Harvard Way in the Study of Religion,” William Darrow (1988); “Religion: A Contested Site in Theology and the Study of Religion,” Francis Schüssler Fiorenza (2000).

4 This rather loose category is only for illustrative purposes, and I do not attempt seriously to categorize the range of items in HTR. Were one to focus solely on articles about Islam or Judaism, for instance, the ratio would of course be greater.

5 Faculty of the Harvard Divinity School, “Harvard Theological Review” news release, 1907 (Bound with HTR 1 [1908]).

6 Front matter, HTR 1 (1908).

7 Front matter, HTR 1 (1908).

8 In HTR 4:1, after title page.

9 In HTR 23:2, after title page.

10 This last sentence disappears by the mid-1930s. Even in recent times, there have been subtle shifts in the statement of purpose. Thus, for example, in 1990 (83:1) we still read the standard claim, “The scope of the Review embraces theology, ethics, the history and philosophy of religion, and cognate subjects. It aims to publish investigations, discussions, and reviews that contribute to the enlargement of knowledge or the advance of thought.” In 1999 (92:4), however, the statement is instead, “The scope of the Review embraces theology, ethics, the history and philosophy of religion, biblical studies, and rabbinic studies. It seeks to publish compelling original research that contributes to the development of scholarly understanding and interpretation.” It is hard to say, however, how much import we are to give to such changes.

11 Only in Volume 56:2 (1963), with the appointment of Krister Stendahl as editor, did a formal division of editor, associate editors, and editorial assistants even begin to appear at the front of HTR. Whatever the reality on the ground, until then HTR was presented as the work of the editorial committee, even when Arthur Nock was clearly “first among equals,” and we are told nothing of how the editorial team might have worked together.

12 Even tributes to retiring editors give few clues: Krister Stendahl on Arthur Darby Nock: “At Harvard his 33-year editorship of the Harvard Theological Review made it a leading international journal” (“Arthur Darby Nock,” HTR 57 [1964] 65–68, at 67). Helmut Koester on Stendahl: “This journal, HTR, owes Krister a special debt. After the death of its editor Arthur Darby Nock, who had guided its course for several decades, Krister Stendahl assumed the editorship. His declared goal was to continue and to defend the legacy of high quality scholarly publication which he had so much admired in this great history-of-religion scholar who had been his friend and mentor and for whose sixtieth birthday he had edited a special issue of the journal.” Ibid. 79:1–3 (1986) viii. See also 24:3 (1931) for a tribute to George Foote Moore, and 26:1 (1933) for remarks honoring James Hardy Ropes. Despite the evident respect and gratitude, none of the statements gives much insight into what distinctive gifts and choices the various editors brought to their projects.

13 From the start, Harvard Divinity Bulletin took over the work of publishing most of the distinguished lectures supported by HDS.

14 Consider, for instance, the contents of the Spring/Summer 2007 issue: “Perspective Knowing and Unknowing,” Will Joyner; “God and Evolution: A New Solution,” Sarah Coakley; “Darwin Was Wrong,” Joan Roughgarden; “Thinking Like a Feminist,” Evelyn Fox Keller; “Stem Cell Dissent,” Eric Cohen; “Does Religion Cause Violence?” William T. Cavanaugh; “Embracing Earth While Facing Death,” Eshin Nishimura; “A Family Rift and a Cautionary Tale,” Ben Westhoff; “A Fateful Separation of Philosophy and Theology,” Louis Dupré; “Real Presences,” by Christine Helmer.

15 Ronald F. Thiemann, “Toward a Critical Theological Education,” HTR 80 (1987) 1–13.

16 Ibid., 12. He cautions his readers on why this matters: “If we cannot come to some broad consensus on these matters, then we will continue to face the necessity of political compromise every time we seek to make a faculty appointment. That is, of course, a recipe for mediocrity.”

17 Ibid.

18 Ibid.

19 See for instance, Anne Monius's “Siva as Heroic Father: Theology and Hagiography in Medieval South India,” HTR 97 (2004)165–97, an essay rich in potential theological implications drawn from the south Indian context. See also my own 2005 essay, “Passionate Comparison: The Intensification of Affect in Interreligious Reading—a Hindu-Christian Example,” HTR 98 (2005) 367–90.