Talk:History of Europe to 1648

I propose we move this to History of Europe (to 1648 AD). The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 10:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Why? I feel we must be exact with titles of courses. The word Survey emphasizes the introductory content and the dates will make the difference between part one (this one) and part two in the future. What is the rational behind your proposal? Dilos1 16:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, Jade Night, I though about it myself and you may be right. As we seem to be avoiding details and dates in titles, I'll change it to History of Europe to 1648, which is short, to the point and denotes indirectly the introductory essence of the course. Thank you for the suggestion. By the way, I think I read that you have just been trusted with the role of the custodian. Congratulations! Dilos1 21:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, though I am currently only a probationary Custodian. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 12:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Other courses

Feel free to incorporate other courses or elements within the Department as part of this course; also be aware that forking may occur. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 10:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thanks Dilos1 08:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Depth

Roughly how many hours do you expect it would take a student to finish this course? The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 22:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, it depends on the devotion of the reader. Although the reading links may seem to be too many, actually in most of the cases only a paragraph or two are basically required from each source. If a reader devotes 6 hours per week, I estimate that it will take him about 3-4 months to complete the whole course. The benefit will be that at the end he/she will have a very solid background of the History of Europe in order to move to more specialized courses. I do not want to make this course a quick get in-and-get out thing. I want it to be a high quality learning project. The student can ask for all the help he/she needs and it will be given to him. However, this is really for serious students who would like to attend a survey of European History and learn things. Dilos1 08:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense to me. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 09:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

You gave me an idea. I'going to add time estimations for each one of the course sections and for the required material because a long list of readings may seem intimidating but the actual required time may not be that much. however, in some sections a student may need to spend more time than in others. Dilos1 09:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Great idea. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 09:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Scope

I love what you're doing here, but I just realized that you're covering Egypt and the Middle East, which are not a part of Europe (though they have links to Europe). Any particular reason for this decision? The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 09:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

A valid question. However, history means politics, economy, society and culture. The Greeks who developed the first civilization on technically European soil did not invent everything. On the contrary, they learnt a lot through trade and other contacts from the peoples of the Near East (I would use Middle East only in a modern history context) (e.g. the Persians –Herodotus says so—who in turn had incorporated the whole previous culture going all the way back to the Sumerians) and the Egyptians (Philosopher Thales claims so).

A student must know some of the political background of the pre-Greek civilizations in order to appreciate what the Greeks got from them as well as how differently they shaped the European civilization. J.S.Mill, an 18th c. thinker, wrote that if the Greeks had not stopped the Persians at Marathon, the British might still be wondering wild in the woods. OK, it’s an exaggeration but points to the direction that there were mighty empires before the Greeks. Why didn’t they succeed in their expansion westwards, towards Europe? What were the differences (one of my exam questions to come) between the pre-Greek and the Greek systems of government? Dilos1 17:24, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

You make several valid points. Being a little bit of a "purist" (you may have noticed), however, I'd prefer less emphasis on this. Would you mind if I came up with an alternative (not a replacement) section which essentially condenses this entire chapter into a single section, and then presented the two alternatives: yours for those interested in a more in-depth approach to pre-European civilizations, and mine for those who wish only to have a passing familiarity with what came before? The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 06:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It would be nice for the student to have this choice, even for all the sections of this course. Go ahead! Dilos1 06:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Jade Knight, I thought a lot over the weekend and I came to the conclusion that you are right. This introductory part needs simplification and focus on history only. I'll work on it in the days ahead. Thank you for the suggestions. Keep up the good work. Dilos1 07:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

No need to thank me, you're the one who's been doing all the outstanding work! I've got my fingers in many pies, and I've been more busy elsewhere, but I think the quality of your content here is very high, and while I'm already fairly familiar with this subject matter, I fully intend on being your first student (to shore up any gaps which might exist in my knowledge of the field). Thanks for doing such a good job—I expect that this course will become the foundation for future work here at the Department of European History. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 07:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

{{history}}

FYI: This template adds the page to Category:History, which is supposed to remain clear of specific projects. I'd appreciate it if you could avoid using it in its current incarnation. I believe Geoff Plourde made another template based on it, which allows you to change the category, maybe {{hist}}. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 07:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

New Changes

Any particular reason for the removal of some explanatory content? The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 07:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Simple language for the student as it had become too sophisticated. Dilos1 08:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I had removed the suggested books temporarily to check for availability. But it's OK for the moment.Dilos1 08:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Both are currently available on Amazon, and the encyclopedia is also currently available on half.com. The Jade Knight ^(d'viser) 09:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. Fine. So we can have them on. Dilos1 07:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

new editing

im starting to edit the medival history section. I have enough knowledge of history to do such thing (after all its just a wiki) The22 19:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Migration period?

I think we should add the migration period as a whole new part of the course, you cant understand the Mongols without understanding the Huns, you can't understand where Charlamenge came from without knowing who the Franks arrived in France. Or is it under "Newcomers to Europe"? The22 03:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)