Archaeology reading Vs liverpool

So I'm deciding between an Archaeology ba at reading or Liverpool. In the league tables Liverpool is above reading and it is more well known. However reading seems to have a better variety of modules. I can see the advantages of both of the universities, but I want some second opinions. Any advice?

Do you want to pursue a career in archaeology? Do you know what areas you are interested in? I'd recommend taking a look at these to help you make your mind up. Liverpool has specialisms that Reading may not, and vice versa. Also, take a look at how long the fieldwork requirements are, and where you can go on digs etc. Liverpool has 2 weeks in Cheshire in first year, then a minimum of 2 weeks elsewhere in second year - people go to places such as Ireland, France, Zambia, the US, Belgium, Greece, Turkey etc (and that's just people I know of). Obviously my experience is somewhat biased, as I went to Liverpool, but if you have any questions, let me know.

I definitely want to go on to become an archaeologist after uni. I'm not quite sure of what areas I want to go into but I find forensics and maritime interesting along with pre-history and medieval archaeology.

If you're interested in maritime, I'd take a look at places like Southampton, in all honesty. The rest of your interests are quite general, and can be covered at most places.

There is time to further specialise at postgraduate level, too, and you can usually cover your areas of interest in most degrees, but I have to note that Liverpool doesn't do any forensics; LJMU in Liverpool has an entire degree on forensics so they can just collaborate with them. But for prehistory, there are excellent people like Dr Pope. If you have questions, I'd recommend getting in touch with the Reading and Liverpool admissions tutors, as they might be able to help you make up your mind. But, as I mentioned, if you have any questions about Liverpool, just let me know.