[feverpitch]

I was just wondeing whether, at Oxford and Cambridge, you can 'construct' History courses that are almost exclusively 20th century, as I know the courses pride themselves on being very flexible. This is the period that draws me most, by far, so at which Uni would I be able to concentrate the most on this?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[Andy the Anarchist]

Well at Oxford, they make it compulsory that you study at least one pre 19th century period of history, and at least one period of British history (I have been told this is because a large majority of students plump for 20th century history to the exclusion of everything else, which leaves specialists in other areas less than happy).

No idea about Cambridge, you can specialise as you go through the course I'd imagine.

[Mayfly]

Originally Posted by Andy the Anarchist

Well at Oxford, they make it compulsory that you study at least one pre 19th century period of history, and at least one period of British history (I have been told this is because a large majority of students plump for 20th century history to the exclusion of everything else, which leaves specialists in other areas less than happy).

No idea about Cambridge, you can specialise as you go through the course I'd imagine.

Two actually, one really early and one slightly less early (oh yes, bow before my complicated historical terminology).

If you go to the history faculty website (history.ox.ac.uk) and look up the course guides, you'll find Oxford at least has some fairly strict course outlines - this isn't to limit your study at all, it's to stop you studying essentially the same thing for 3 years. You can specialize, certainly, but not exclusively. Anyway, I would do a basic course outline, but it would take too long, and be far less eloquent than the one they provide, sooooo...

No idea about Cambridge.

[feverpitch]

Thanks for the help so far.

It seems you only have limited scope for specalising in the 1st year; the best I can come up with is
1) British Isles since 1900
2) General History - 1815-1914
3) Optional subject - Theories of War and Peace - Europe 1890-1914
4) Approach to History

Any other help would be much appeciated!

[oriel historian]

Originally Posted by feverpitch

Thanks for the help so far.

It seems you only have limited scope for specalising in the 1st year; the best I can come up with is
1) British Isles since 1900
2) General History - 1815-1914
3) Optional subject - Theories of War and Peace - Europe 1890-1914
4) Approach to History

Any other help would be much appeciated!

Speaking from experience - I wouldn't go about doing that if I were you. It really frees you up if you do the stuff you don't like from Prelims - you only have to pass so that's easily achieved and keep the specialisms for Finals.

The course you've outlined there would leave you open to severe replication across your papers and that isn't allowed at all. You would be checked with a curriculum such as that.

[necessarily benevolent]

Come on, what's the point of just going to a university like Oxford and studying what you know? I'm obsessed with 20th century European dictatorships but wouldn't base everything I study around them. Explore new horizons.

And I suggest you apply to Cambridge.

[feverpitch]

Thanks...could you expand a litle on why Cambridge would be better?

Oriel historian: yes you're right I'm better off changing the British so I can do it in years 2 and 3.

[oriel historian]

Originally Posted by feverpitch

Thanks...could you expand a litle on why Cambridge would be better?

Oriel historian: yes you're right I'm better off changing the British so I can do it in years 2 and 3.

I think you'll want to spread your interests around a bit more. You'll really get sick of Bismark and Clausewitz with those choices.

[necessarily benevolent]

Originally Posted by feverpitch

Thanks...could you expand a litle on why Cambridge would be better?

Who said anything about it being better? I said, 'apply to Cambridge' *nudge**nudge* 'say no more'. You know what I mean? eh? You know what I mean?

[feverpitch]

Originally Posted by oriel historian

I think you'll want to spread your interests around a bit more. You'll really get sick of Bismark and Clausewitz with those choices.

You're probably right...the stuff in years 2 and 3 looks fantastic though, especially the Great Society!

[oriel historian]

Originally Posted by feverpitch

You're probably right...the stuff in years 2 and 3 looks fantastic though, especially the Great Society!

It's just that it's more interesting to have a medieval paper, a modern paper, an early modern one, and an approaches / historiography paper especially for prelims. You get a flavour of whether you like the periods and can settle more for finals.

[Chiron]

At Cambridge you have to study at least one module before 1750 for your Part I (first two years). This means that, theoretically, four out of five modules could be 19th and 20th centuries.

When I first came up to Cambridge I thought my passion was nineteenth century British political history - now I love economic history and both the Papers I'm taking next year are economic and social. University History can change what sort of history most interests you with surprising ease.

[All at once]

Let's put it this way:

Oxford to Cambridge is what Asafa Powell is to Usain Bolt.

[Andy the Anarchist]

Originally Posted by oriel historian

Speaking from experience - I wouldn't go about doing that if I were you. It really frees you up if you do the stuff you don't like from Prelims - you only have to pass so that's easily achieved and keep the specialisms for Finals.

The course you've outlined there would leave you open to severe replication across your papers and that isn't allowed at all. You would be checked with a curriculum such as that.

The man speaks truth

And another thing, if you are only interested in such a narrow field of history, are you sure you are going to be able to sustain interest for a whole 3 years?

Because I can imagine it getting very tedious and repetitive after a while

My advice, take a broad array of options in your first year, you may be surprised and find something you like. If not, you never have to study it again and can concentrate on your real interests for the next couple of years.

[JohnStuartMill]

Well, if you're really only interested in twentieth-century history then you *could* construct a degree at Cambridge that would pretty much only encompass that. As has been said, you would have to do one paper that predates 1750 in your Part I but there is no reason that the other four couldn't be from among these five twentieth-century papers:

Paper 6: British Political & Constitutional History since 1867
Paper 11: British Economic & Social History since c. 1870
Paper 18: European History since 1890
Paper 23: The West and the Third World since the First World War to the present day
Paper 24: The History of the United States from 1865

You also have to do a Themes & Sources paper for which you write a 5,000 word essay. The two papers that are going to be on offer over the next few years that relate specifically to the twentieth-century are 'Politics of Memory in Germany after 1945' (English sources) and 'World War II and its legacy in France' (French sources).

Part II (your final year) is harder to comment on as it depends entirely on who is around and running papers. Despite that, it is still probable that you could select papers than only cover the twentieth-century. At the moment, for instance, by writing a dissertation on a specific topic of interest (anything you can find someone to supervise you for), taking Paper 7 The rise of the secret world: Governments and intelligence communities since c.1900 and doing any of the following Special Subjects:

# Class, Party and the Politics of Social Identity in England, 1914-1945 (K)
# Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin and the 'Grand Alliance', 1940-1945 (L)
# TE Lawrence and Gertrude Bell: Britain and the Arabs 1914-1922 (M)
# Martin Luther King Jr and the Civil Rights Movement (Q)

All that being said, I would really recommend branching out at university as you may just find that you grow to love another period of History. I'd recommend looking at the faculty website (http://www.hist.cam.ac.uk) and seeing if anything there takes your fancy. All the faculty's reading lists are available to anyone and there is also plenty of information detailing the structure of the course.

[feverpitch]

Thanks a lot - that's a tremendous help.

I agree that branching out is something I should give a go, so am planning to read a few books outside of my 'normal' history reading.

Am probably leaning towards applying to Oxford at the moment.

[Jacobite]

During the first two years at Cambridge ('Part I' of the tripos) you have to study five papers. Of these one must finish in or before 1750. As such a little mediaeval or early modern history would seem to be mandatory. Perhaps the History Political Thought up till 1750 would be a palatable way of fulfilling this requirement?

I would not despair however - you may well discover that once you arrive and begin studying a pre-C20 period you find it extremely interesting. The fact that the faculty continues to insist upon students taking a reasonably broad range of papers suggests that many people do indeed have this experience.

[rkd]

Originally Posted by feverpitch

Thanks a lot - that's a tremendous help.

I agree that branching out is something I should give a go, so am planning to read a few books outside of my 'normal' history reading.

Am probably leaning towards applying to Oxford at the moment.

Oxford History requires you to take two pre-modern papers, rather than just one at Cambridge. You could do both in your first year, though (alongside a modern Optional Subject and the methods paper), so that only modern papers count towards your final degree - and then that gives you the chance to fall in love with the medieval or early modern period.

[seraphina]

I'd just add that I was initially not happy about the way Oxford forces you to do a medieval, an early-modern and a modern paper. I was hating the thought of taking a medieval paper (and not having the advice given here, I left it till finals to fulfill the requirement). However, I ended up with my highest score (74 - I was absolutely shocked) on that paper. It goes to show that being forced to work outside of your comfort zone can be both interesting and really beneficial.