This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Archaeology and Anthropology - pros and cons for each

Ok so before we get into a massive flame war, i'm not asking which one is better - I know that that is impossible to decide here. However, for the case of Anth & Arch, what are the pro's and cons for oxford and Cambridge?

p.s. Yes I know it says I'm doing medicine in my sig - but am currently having a major rethink...

Reply 1

rachelcee

9

why are you deciding to switch from medicine to arch/anth? if it is just to get into oxbridge, forget it.

that said, pros of arch/anth at oxford, in my opinion - much more chilled tutors. i found the atmosphere at the arch/anth open day at cambs rather awkward and definitely nowhere near as friendly as that at oxford. probably down to the larger size of the arch/anth cohort at cambs.

Reply 2

madchillie

At Oxford (I think) you have to do Archaeology, Biological Anthropology and Social Anthropology for all three years. At Cambridge, you do all three in the first year, and then you specialise in only one of them after that. This basically made my life a whole lot easier in choosing, as I only really wanted to do Social Anthropology so chose Cambridge for that.

Reply 3

llys

17

At Cambridge you can now do Ancient Near Eastern Studies within Arch & Anth (it used to be in AMES). Which is cool if you're interested in ancient languages & archeology of Mesopotamia, but otherwise probably not a deciding factor. :biggrin:

You can also combine the two at Oxford BTW, only it's not as straightforward.

Reply 4

llys

17

rachelcee

why are you deciding to switch from medicine to arch/anth? if it is just to get into oxbridge, forget it.

that said, pros of arch/anth at oxford, in my opinion - much more chilled tutors. i found the atmosphere at the arch/anth open day at cambs rather awkward and definitely nowhere near as friendly as that at oxford. probably down to the larger size of the arch/anth cohort at cambs.

Hey, do you know how many there are, and do A&As seem to know each other/interact socially intercollegiate-ly (if that's a word :wink:

) ?

Reply 5

Catsmeat

13

AWZC

Ok so before we get into a massive flame war, i'm not asking which one is better - I know that that is impossible to decide here. However, for the case of Anth & Arch, what are the pro's and cons for oxford and Cambridge?

p.s. Yes I know it says I'm doing medicine in my sig - but am currently having a major rethink...

I'd suggest that, initially, you research as thoroughly as possible the course descriptions and information provided by each Department of the respective Universities. This will only be a vague transcript of the course, but it will provide a general structure for what each includes.

Do you have a leaning towards either anthropology, or archaeology? It may be too early to entrench yourself with any particular camp, but it's worth understanding that within each department you'll have access to a range of very specific institutions/resources. For instance, archaeologists at Cambridge have the benefit of the McDonald Centre for Archaeological Research. This unusual, hexagonal structure (known fondly as a bee-hive shape) is a centre for research into a number of leading disciplines. Furthermore, biological anthropologists have access to the LCHES centre (Leverhume Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies); an institute that is involved in the multi-vectored research into hominin evolution and associated fields.

I can't prosletyze for Oxford, but as another poster has observed the course maintains an equal, three year spread over the three disciplines, whilst Cambridge offers specialisation after the first year (ideal if you have specific interests). That doesn't prevent you taking numerous modules from the other two (and outside) departments, however. The teaching is well organised, whilst the strengths of the staff are in their ability to integrate the three fields. Some elements of the first year, in providing such a broad church of modules over much time and space, can be confusing. I believe that next year the course has been further remodulated in order to compensate for its often diffuse feeling (i.e., threading broader and fewer themes through the somewhat unpopular 4a paper).

Equally, for the cohort applying for 2008/2009 entry (and afterwards), the course has integrated both Assyriology and Egyptology from their precedent home in Oriental Studies. This means that from the first year you can specialise in the archaeology, history and languages of those civilisations.

Reply 6

AWZC

OP

13

Thanks for the replies so far - keep them coming! In reply to rachellcee, I am considering the change as archaeology has always been a major interest of mine alongside history, and reading into anthropology, I'm very interested in that as well. Medicine is still an attractive option, which I might well take up still, but there are many cons attatched and so I am simply majorly reconsidering my life plan.

Reply 7

llys

17

Catsmeat

Equally, for the cohort applying for 2008/2009 entry (and afterwards), the course has integrated both Assyriology and Egyptology from their precedent home in Oriental Studies. This means that from the first year you can specialise in the archaeology, history and languages of those civilisations.

Hi Catsmeat :smile:

- do you know more about this option? I think I've read everything there is about it on the net - the course websites and the AMES (formerly Oriental Studies) website etc. - I've even read the course handbook lol - but it would be nice to get some insider knowledge. For example I have some questions:

- most colleges haven't updated their course pages yet; the only college that even mentions the possibility of doing assyriology within archeology and anthropology is Trinity College, and they say they particularly invite applications from people interested in that. So I suppose that would be the logical place to apply to in such a case, especially as they have tutors specialising in assyriology and egyptology. but do you know of any other college which has an assyriology focus or fellow who does research in that area?

- how strictly do you have to follow the course options? so for example, if I were to study this, I would like to learn Akkadian (which is obviously an option), BUT I would also like to learn Sumerian, Aramaic/Syriac, and possibly Old Iranian & Persian. In addition to what else I'd have to take, but I would still want it to count for the degree. Is that possible?

I realise this sounds like I'm set on applying for this; I'm actually not (realistically I can't do everything I'm interested in :frown:

so I'll probably settle for maths/physics), but it's a little dream of mine and I think it's really interesting. Still if you have any insider knowledge on any of this ^, would be very nice of you to share. :smile:

PS: I PMed you. sorry if that was obnoxious. :biggrin:

Reply 8

rachelcee

9

i can't say for sure but traditionally isn't oxford better for anthropology and cambridge for archaeology? well, of course, they both have excellent archaeology and anthropology departments nonetheless. i prefer the more homely feel at oxford more though! :biggrin:

Reply 9

rachelcee

9

ok someone neg repped me with this reason - Idiot, shut up and think before you make another post like that. If the individual was applying just to get in why the hell would they retract offers for medicine. Are you mad? Go play somewhere else.

people choose not to apply for medicine at oxbridge because they know it's too difficult to get into and so choose a supposedly 'easy' subject like arch/anth JUST to get into oxbridge. your point makes no sense and are you just rude. stop being so childish.

Archaeology and Anthropology - pros and cons for each

Related discussions

Articles for you