Hat 2023

Was difficult because it was a work of mythology - how much could you plausibly infer about the priorities of society from a popular myth? It often felt like I was taking a big leap of logic in my answer

I found it ok, like you said I think the text wasn’t as good as last year’s, but hoping my response was fine!

The extract was meh but looking at what you guys wrote about I'm kinda scared. I spoke about how they prioritise ancestral connections in decision making especially with the ruler. I also spoke about the reciprocal relationship between the ruler and their tribes and how the king is meant to be an arbitrator of disputes and in exchange the tribes provide him with loyalty in the form of war-bands. I also spoke about how a main preoccupation was the equitability of transactions especially agricultural ones.

I really liked the experience and the extract, it seemed quite interesting. I think I didn’t write much, probably isn’t enough. Did you include something about agriculture and justice? How much did you write?

The extract was meh but looking at what you guys wrote about I'm kinda scared. I spoke about how they prioritise ancestral connections in decision making especially with the ruler. I also spoke about the reciprocal relationship between the ruler and their tribes and how the king is meant to be an arbitrator of disputes and in exchange the tribes provide him with loyalty in the form of war-bands. I also spoke about how a main preoccupation was the equitability of transactions especially agricultural ones.

I wrote about agriculture and animal husbandry. Also about natural resources like gold, silver and bronze, used to create artefacts (was in the source) and about justice and stability. And that the king had the responsibility to solve disputes and control the military. As bias, I talked about Christianity and how it influenced his views.

OH MY GOD CHRISTIANITY, THAT WAS WHAT I FORGOT TO WRITE ABOUT! I knew I had missed something 😭

I’m so conflicted ngl. I don’t think I wrote enough but what I wrote was ok? Like the fact it was a myth, written by a judge (explains the need for truth), the importance of communal living, the apparent lack of hierarchy, value = usefulness, the fact it may not demonstrate what ppl actually want but it’s been used for 500 odd years so clearly it’s at least semi relevant. But I was so VAGUE and I didn’t write well like usually I’m good with style of essay but I just sort word vomited lol

Oh and Christianity like maybe the values were based on Christian texts, values like idleness and sloth were seen as bad. All in all not my best but I’m confident we all did so much better than we think! Well done for even doing the test guys we r all clever and capable ppl!<3

I’m so conflicted ngl. I don’t think I wrote enough but what I wrote was ok? Like the fact it was a myth, written by a judge (explains the need for truth), the importance of communal living, the apparent lack of hierarchy, value = usefulness, the fact it may not demonstrate what ppl actually want but it’s been used for 500 odd years so clearly it’s at least semi relevant. But I was so VAGUE and I didn’t write well like usually I’m good with style of essay but I just sort word vomited lol

Why is everyone writing about Christianity. It was barely in the text there was only one line on it at the outset. Like if you talk about the values of Christianity isn't that external knowledge. I though you'd make a passing comment on it and that is it.

Damn I wrote the opposite. I wrote how it is a highly hierarchical society with serfs/ slaves, overlords and merchants.

For mine I mainly tried to critically evaluate the source and how despite being mythology it is clearly useful in practice. I spoke about the truth needed in a ruler and the stuff about value - but tried to more focus on analysing the source as a whole. Only wrote 800 words!