The Problem of Pamela Bradley (1 Viewer)

[nessie_lee]

I asked my teacher about this, and he said there's no reason not to quote Bradley.... she's just as good as anyone else, and ppl who get band 6 answers quote her.. so yeh!

 

[classics_chic]

I got band 6, and everyone I talked to who got over a band 4 didn't quote her.

See my list of books to use instead of Bradley. I'm really trying to help you out here.

If you use Bradley, the marker will think "another lemming who can't think for themselves". That can't be good for their attitude, let alone the fact that Bradley's content isn't worth sneezing at.

 

[Protector]

I asked my teacher about this, and he said there's no reason not to quote Bradley.... she's just as good as anyone else, and ppl who get band 6 answers quote her.. so yeh!

I don't suppose I could have a reference to a year, possibly even the students name that got band 6? Where I could get a copy of this paper, and a potential quote?

To my knowledge, if Bradley is used as a MAJOR SOURCE, you're not only an idiot, but you're also calling her a scholar... Your choice, your marks, your HSC and your UAI. All I'm saying is, Bradley isn't a source to be used IMHO, and from what I know.

More importantly, is it the only source you're using? As far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't quote her. But if you wanted to, go for it, just as long as you make sure you have other quotes in mind as well...

But then again, why waste brain space on something that you've got backup for just because its not a good idea?

Get a second opinion, I think your teacher is an idiot.

 

[nessie_lee]

I don't suppose I could have a reference to a year, possibly even the students name that got band 6? Where I could get a copy of this paper, and a potential quote?

To my knowledge, if Bradley is used as a MAJOR SOURCE, you're not only an idiot, but you're also calling her a scholar... Your choice, your marks, your HSC and your UAI. All I'm saying is, Bradley isn't a source to be used IMHO, and from what I know.

More importantly, is it the only source you're using? As far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't quote her. But if you wanted to, go for it, just as long as you make sure you have other quotes in mind as well...

But then again, why waste brain space on something that you've got backup for just because its not a good idea?

Get a second opinion, I think your teacher is an idiot.

Oh Gee don't go getting all nasty or anything..... the point is, to get a band 6 answer u need to use a VARIETY of sources, and if u include Bradley, that's ok... VARIETY is the key... so don't go bagging me out thinking that i ONLY use Bradley.. gee she aint the God of ancient history or anything, but her stuff is still useful. As long as you integrate it into your argument well... there's no reason not to use her as one of MANY historians you quote

Oh by the way, my teacher isn't an idiot... he probably knows a lot more than you do, and he never said ONLY use Bradley... He's an excellent, helpful teacher, and i'd take his word over your pathetic spitefulness any day

 

[Caratacus]

You use secondary sources like Bradley on points of interpretation. The only reason to use them is when they have a distinct line of interpretation.

I wonder how Bradley fits in here. She is hardly known for her research or scholarship. What exactly does she have to say or contribute to a debate that is unique?

Sources like Thomas Wiedemann or Paul Zanker or Sir Ronald Syme or Anthony Barrett or Guglielmo Ferrero or Pat Southern or Barbara Levick (to focus just on the Julio-Claudians) all have distinct lines of interpretation based on their own scholarship. But how does Pamela Bradley?

 

[classics_chic]

Pamela Bradley is convenient: she's the textbook for most people, so people quote her. She doesn't say anything unique. This is why you don't quote her. But people don't seem to get that. And they find other sources intimidating.

 

[xeuyrawp]

Ok- whatever you people say.
Bradley may be a waste of time, but according to the BOS people I've talked to, she's fine to quote.

I'm sure you know better than the people that set and mark the exams.

 

[classics_chic]

I've also asked the people who set and mark exams. If you want good marks, don't quote her.

I've also asked university lecturers on their thoughts on her as a viable source/ commentary. The answer's always the same: don't quote her, only use her if you're desperate.

I don't claim to know better than anyone. but I've done my HSC, I got a band 6, so I know how to get good marks in Ancient. So excuse me for caring!

 

[angelduck]

Yeah, and i know a dude who got the premier's list (yes Merewether ppl, Sam willis, harpy's little god boy) who probably quoted her, as our teacher says you can. They cannot mark you down for who you quote.

But, just for interests sake, you say you can not quote a historian who has written a textbook, so, in minoans, you cannot quote Gae Callender, she wrote a textbook. In rome, you cannot quote H.H. Scullard? Are you completely nuts??? Of course you can quote these people, so again i say, what leads you to he idea that you cannot quote Bradley (and i know you say HSC markers say you can't, but shes a historian, you CAN quote historians......)

 

[Caratacus]

I'm not saying you can't quote her. You can quote Fred Flintstone if you want. I'm just asking, what point would you be making in your answer by quoting Pamela Bradley? How is she groundbreaking or of interest in any point of interpretation? It's not as if she has any particular interest for her take on Roman history.

With Mommsen you would be emphasising a legalistic interpretation, or his theory of dyarchy; with Syme you would be pointing to his reading of Augustus' transformation of the res publica as a kind of revolution, like the communist or fascist revolutions of the early twentieth century, with Augustus as absolute ruler; or perhaps you'd point to Syme's prosopographical approach. With Ferrero you would be looking at his very postitive interpretations of Livia or Agrippina II; or perhaps Barrett's more balanced reading. But what line of interpretation is Bradley noted for?

You might as well quote Excel HSC Notes, or your teacher. There are many far better and more respected and well-known historians to refer to as secondary sources than her. Why drive a 1981 Datsun when you can drive a state-of-the-art Ferrari?

 

[classics_chic]

Agreed. Quoting Bradley (and I speak for Greece and Rome, and probably Egypt too) is about as useful as saying "classics_chic said..."

I hope to be a respectable historian one day, but for the meantime you won't get anything (except possibly the award of "non-serious attempt"- an automatic fail) if you quote me! And although you won't get non-serious attempt for quoting Bradley, you won't get anything else for it!

 

[angelduck]

hehehe. Well, mafia is okay, in the trials we can just quote me!!!

Ahhhh. AP Lewis, what a historian...

 

[renny]

the reason not to quote pamela bradley is not because she wrote a 'text book', it is the fact that she is not a recognised historian. In the same way that say James Harpur is for modern history, they have simply gone out there and collated information. Whilst Scullard has also written a text book, he is perhaps more appropriate to quote because he is a professor and a professional historian (he writes articles and the such)

as for bradley, shes pretty good in the area of helping u to understand different things, and she is good in working out the main points of the diff topics. basically she is useful as she has written a good summary.

if u have scullards book, go look at the footnotes in the back, they are v. good and more in depth/insightful than the narrative in his text. its in this area where he discussed things like historical debate etc.

of course teachers arent going to 'mark you down' for using bradley, but the fact is, if u use recognised historians u are conveying a more sophisticated level of response.

 

[silvermoon]

Yeah, and i know a dude who got the premier's list (yes Merewether ppl, Sam willis, harpy's little god boy) who probably quoted her, as our teacher says you can. They cannot mark you down for who you quote.

But, just for interests sake, you say you can not quote a historian who has written a textbook, so, in minoans, you cannot quote Gae Callender, she wrote a textbook. In rome, you cannot quote H.H. Scullard? Are you completely nuts??? Of course you can quote these people, so again i say, what leads you to he idea that you cannot quote Bradley (and i know you say HSC markers say you can't, but shes a historian, you CAN quote historians......)

sam willis, harpy's love child, leader of the 'class that bounced and could do no wrong so lets all imitate them down to the seating arrangement' quoted pamela bradley. no i dont believe it angelduck. my world is shattered.
ok, does any1 else feel that this thread (like oh-so-many-others in this forum) is going nowhere. i second m00gal's vote. if u wanna quote bradley, do so at ur own peril. every1 who feels they shouldnt quote bradley...dont do it then. the one thing thats clear from this thread is that every1's very divided on this and no1's willing 2 change sides, so why dont we all just agree 2 disagree and get on with our pointless little ancient lives?

 

[tina_goes_doo]

why dont we all just agree 2 disagree and get on with our pointless little ancient lives?

I don't agree to that. Everyone must quote her at least once in your hsc or you will automatically fail!

 

[silvermoon]

I don't agree to that. Everyone must quote her at least once in your hsc or you will automatically fail!

no! i refuse! i shall succumb to quoting the great gae callender/giraffe lady, but never will i stoop 2 pamela bradley!
enough of this play nicely crap
*brandishes sword*
on guard! i challenge u tina 2 a duel!
*slaps tina_goes_doo in face with glove*
have at you!

 

[starlighty]

To end this once and for all, I consulted the '2003 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre: Ancient History' document, available from the BOS website here: http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/hsc_exams/hsc2003exams/pdf_doc/ancient_history_er_03.pdf This is what I found...take from the following what you will, but it is clear that HSC markers make a clear distinction between general textbook 'sources', such as Bradley's Using Evidence series, and ACADEMIC scholarship, written by recognised historians/experts, for example, Russell Meiggs 'History of Greece'.

*"A note of concern was that many candidates were dependent on information from general textbooks rather than accessing primary sources and academic scholarship." (pg 5, General Comments, fourth paragraph)
*"Candidates should be instructed to do the following: Avoid reliance upon a selection of general information (eg student textbooks instead of historical scholarship)...Avoid the fabrication of historical sources, both ancient and modern." (pg 6, Part (c)) [That last one's aimed at you, Merewether Mafia and your AP Lewis!!! Isn't your school a selective one? For shame... ]

I'm not going to say DO or DON'T quote Bradley, but I will say this: all students aiming for a Band 6 should be going beyond their textbooks/class notes ANYWAY, examining further primary sources and modern scholarship written by recognised historians/experts. If you've done enough research, you should have juicy quotes, analysis and commentary from recognised authorities on your particular topic coming out of your ears, making it unneccessary for you to quote Bradley anyway! (And for those of you who insist that Bradley is a recognised historian, I challenge you to give me the names of any books, journal articles, etc. that she has written that were not specifically designed to be used as basic textbooks by HSC students!)

 

[SimpaticO]

You shouldn't really quote at all in Ancient essays. The questions ask you to "make reference" to other sources and this is what you should really do. In other words, discuss the theories of particular historians on the issues you are covering within the essay. You waste too much energy memorizing quotes and your essays often end up more quote than your own interpretation and thought which is a big no no.

Even our teachers and co - ordinators have told us this. If you rely on massive amounts of quotes, the markers get the impression that you haven't got enough of your own knowledge on the subject to make your essay. Our teacher kills us if we use quotes in written essays, they are for written assessment tasks that you hand in, not for exam essays like the HSC and trial.

 

[glitterfairy]

Just wondering, but how many sources/quotes should we have? I'm getting extremely mind-boggled by the amount of sources some people have...

 

[silvermoon]

*"Candidates should be instructed to do the following: Avoid reliance upon a selection of general information (eg student textbooks instead of historical scholarship)...Avoid the fabrication of historical sources, both ancient and modern." (pg 6, Part (c)) [That last one's aimed at you, Merewether Mafia and your AP Lewis!!! Isn't your school a selective one? For shame...

hahaha! point taken! yes, our school is selective and yes we should know better. what do they teach us? only the best way to fabricate our sources without getting caught! oh the wonders of a modern education!