Most modern NT study of Paul tends to be myopic. The “history of exegesis” tends to go back to the 1970s and occasionally a little farther. This isn’t my assessment, it’s Tom Wright’s. I agree with him. I tried recently to do a bit to remedy this by at least introducing folks to one significant 16th-century commentator on Romans. The essay is “Olevianus and the Old Perspective on Paul: A Preliminary Report.” You can see that essay in the most recent number (issue) of the Confessional Presbyterian Journal. There’s another essay surveying all of Olevianus’ Pauline commentaries to appear in 2009 in a collection published by Brill. More info to come when I have it.
You can keep up with developments at the CPJ at their feed here.