The Problem of Pamela Bradley (1 Viewer)

[abba86amy]

hello fellow anicent buddies!
This post attracted my attention straight away.

From what I've heard (from teachers etc) you can't quote from Bradley. I'm not sure why, but im assuming because her text is a bit too simple/basic for yr 12 standards, and technically she's not really a historian. (some1 mentioned this b4)

What i highly reccomend u guys doin, is checkin out the quotes she has in her textbook, follow it up in the notes section at the back, borrow the primary ancient text, and read thru it to get more quotes. =)

It mite take longer and u may have to summarise ur own notes, but trust me, its really worth ur time and effort! My teacher said, to get into a higher band, like band 6 u need to have quotes from ancient as well as modern historians to support ur arguement etc.
Im doing Greece as historical period and society, so i recc. :

Ancient His: Herodotus (must have!), Plutarch, Thucydides, Aeschlyus (comic writer so u can comment on bias, prejudice etc)...

Modern: Buckley (must have!), Powell, de Ste Croix, Bury and Meiggs and Ehrenburg.

Hope all this helps! Good luck w/ ur trials for ppl who are havin them! ---> scoots back to study for anicent tomoro! ='P

 

[nessie_lee]

My goodness i hope this isn't true! ..our teachers give us Bradley's stuff all the time, like as extra material, saying we should quote her and stuff, and i believe them, she has some pretty good stuff.... I rekon if u mix it up a bit, between ppl like Bradley, and Ancient writers like Herodotus, Plutarch, etc.. u shud be right.. they like to see a variety

 

[silvermoon]

ur right nessie_lei - u can quote her, as long as u have other ppl 2 back it up and u dont place 2 much emphasis on her. shes just not seen as such a high-brow historian

 

[Fido]

and it's really not just bradley, you're not meant to quote any text books (/authors) as sources. apparently that would just be too convenient or something. but you sooo still can, just say plutarch said it!

 

[Katjif]

Hey, just to add in another opinion. My teacher always says don't quote an "author' (i.e: Bradley), rather quote a historian (i.e: Scullard). However, I just had an assessment, got full marks (ranked first) and openly discussed the reliability of Bradley. Ook, so basically I said she was crap and couldn't be taken seriously, so my EDUCATED(hehe) opinion is not to quote her, unless you are disproving something the says. Also, remember to make it clear that she is an AUTHOR, not a valued HISTORIAN.

 

[Lundy]

It's not a good idea to quote from a textbook. Really, it doesn't look good. The markers want to see that you've done extra research and examined a variety of secondary sources (read: books written by historians that you have to actually check out from the library and read in your own time).

 

[silvermoon]

It's not a good idea to quote from a textbook. Really, it doesn't look good. The markers want to see that you've done extra research and examined a variety of secondary sources (read: books written by historians that you have to actually check out from the library and read in your own time).

this is true of course - but hey, how r they gonna know whether or not u have actually read the ancient sources? really, if ur pressed 4 time, theres no need 2 bother - if ur textbook author uses an ancient source 4 their information, just paraphrase the opinion and 'forget' 2 write that u found this source in a textbook - works 4 me!

 

[tina_goes_doo]

Fido! You stole my signiture!!

Quoting from text books does make you seem like you havn't checked out different perspectives and historiography. Hey, imagine if someone quoted the macquarie study guide or something!

Honestly, i'm just going to play it safe and not quote her. There are plenty of sources and historiography you could use besides her. Even make up some historians if you have to. If there's a thing going around about examiners not liking her, give the baby the bottle and just don't do it.

 

[Lundy]

this is true of course - but hey, how r they gonna know whether or not u have actually read the ancient sources? really, if ur pressed 4 time, theres no need 2 bother - if ur textbook author uses an ancient source 4 their information, just paraphrase the opinion and 'forget' 2 write that u found this source in a textbook - works 4 me!

The markers don't know that! As long as it appears you've gone and researched different historians they can't fault you.

But still, I don't recommend relying on the textbook for all your sources.

 

[everpopularmark]

All this about not ebing able to quote Bradley is crap.
I've come first in every assessment task in ancient since year 11 and I quote Bradley.
Of course I also quote Redford, Grimal, Steinforff, Seele, Lawless, Wilson, Gardiner, Callender et al for Egypt and Callender, Marinatos, Mc Cloy, Evans, Platon, Castledon, Wunderlich et al for the Minans.
Qoute a variety of historains and youll do well, so yes you can use Bradley, as long as you use others as well

 

[angelduck]

Yeah, come on ppl, i think ive said this a thousand times already, but YOU CAN QUOTE HER!!!!!!!!!1
You just need to include other opinions and sources, dont just rely on her. They cannot mark you down for including her, they aren't allowed.

 

[classics_chic]

Yeah, come on ppl, i think ive said this a thousand times already, but YOU CAN QUOTE HER!!!!!!!!!1
You just need to include other opinions and sources, dont just rely on her. They cannot mark you down for including her, they aren't allowed.

Sorry to seem aggressive but do you contest the word of all my ancient history teachers, lecturers, and tutors? Plus the markers I asked in the HSC Advice Line last year?

You might have got away with it thus far in school, but you will not get away with it in the HSC, or in any other formal environment, because she is not a historian, and everything she says is said in historian's texts in far more appropriate ways for this kind of work!

 

[angelduck]

Yes, i will contest them. In the HSC you CANNOT be marked down for discussing and mentioning appropriate historians. Only use her if appropriate, fine, but this applies to all historians. Back her up with other historians and sources, yes, and again, this applies to all historians. You cannot be marked down for mentioning historiography, no matter the source, if you back up your clainms. You are not beoing assessed on the historians you use, but how you use them, how they are integrated into your argument, who you discuss them withm, and in which questions you discuss them in.

 

[tina_goes_doo]

Me so confused. Me no know what to do.....

 

[angelduck]

it'll all be okay tina, it;'lll all be okay (if only ii could spell)

 

[silvermoon]

2 things angelduck:
firstly, u r right that u cant be MARKED DOWN for including bradley, however, this does not mean that u will get marks for quoting her. they do not give marks for quoting bradley, so u may as well just not bother 2 do it.
secondly, u r right that u have said ur opinion on this 100 times - get over it! ur boring me stupid! (and yes, tina, i know im already stupid so dont even bother 2 reply 2 that!)

 

[silvermoon]

actually, now that i really think about it...
whats all the fuss over anyway? geez, ppl r gettn so worked up over this. the point is, theres so many other historians u could use with better, newer, more in-depth theories...so why not just use them ands forget about bradley?

 

[angelduck]

Yeah, its true reni...

But i want ppl to realise YOU WONT BE MARKED DOWN!!!!!!!!1

Yeah, o ur not gonna get marks, but you wont be marked down. And im sure you'd get marks if you mentioned her in relattion to other historians/sources, necause it shows historiographyt, and its crap, but that iswhat the course is aboiut now

 

[classics_chic]

Yes, i will contest them. In the HSC you CANNOT be marked down for discussing and mentioning appropriate historians.

Yes: appropriate historians. Bradley is not an appropriate historian. And I take back what I said before: you can't be marked DOWN, but you won't be given marks for using historians if you only quote Bradley, and you won't get the marks for using a variety if she's the second one you use. Also, you will not be awarded as many marks for using historians if you use her. It's that simple.

I wish that this didn't have to be a contentious issue. As silvermoon said,

actually, now that i really think about it...
whats all the fuss over anyway? geez, ppl r gettn so worked up over this. the point is, theres so many other historians u could use with better, newer, more in-depth theories...so why not just use them ands forget about bradley?

Unfortunately, Bradley's convenient, so people will go on using her. But you can't say I haven't warned you!

 

[Protector]

Me so confused. Me no know what to do.....

Don't touch Bradley with a 4 foot pole. The answer is simple.
Get a primary source or a scholar.
Bradley is NEITHER.
Short Answer: Bradley is worthless.

On another note... if you like Bradley the insides of your brain obviously don't function as they were designed. It is a summary of a summary, which was probably paraphrased from an encylopedia, which demonstrates the absolute value that is will be lacking in your essay if you feel the undying need to quote this third rate trash... Thats my 2 cents.

To answer any questions, no I do not know Pamela Bradley, but my history teacher does. In fact, the entire department knows her, and they, and she, are well aware of my dislike for her works...