Im not entirely sure how I feel about that essay. I think on reflection it could have been a lot better.
However, I can only truly make a judgement when I have the essay back. Then I can see where I need improvement, and how drastically off track I was. This feeling comes from the fact we are starting to edge into what I was saying in my essay, the ‘ethics’ and 'philosophy’ of the study of Ancient History.
Whilst Im talking about lectures I must say that I find these introduction lectures especially interesting, a more in-depth lecture would be wonderful, however time consternates are always an issue. This short and brief outline is a brilliant way to start the subject. Not only does it provide an understanding of the breadths of the subject [avoiding the word scope here] but also a teaser for the rest of the year. I cant remember excitedly who Silki mentioned was delivering lectures on the Minoan civilisations but I am defiantly going to them.
[side note] This is because I used them in the A level archaeology paper because their culture spreads over those rather archaic 'stages of culture’ (egalitarian, chiefdom, emperors etc.). My knowledge of them is sadly only at an A-level grade and the chance to expand it would be wonderful.
Anyway, back to what I was saying. After finishing them its nice to go onto what I have been reading about for so long. It will be nice to add to my collection of theories and ideas as they have been in Archaeology, it would also be nice to see how wrong I am in my essay. Disproving yourself is the only way to test if you truly believe in what your saying. And it does help if you have Northern blood.
Alas I shall sign off to read yet more books, this time checked against the BMCR.