Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
I will say, I find the demand that I be able to teach, like, everything from Latin and Greek to Myth but also history into the early modern period (can you do global history? why yes, yes I can)...
...and yet I feel like we all know classical philologists who remain intensely, hyper-specialized in pure philology.
Which is fine! Be a literature person! Academics are specialists! Just sure wish I got to be one too 
In Greece they are all considered philologists if they want to work in public school and teach modern and ancient language and literature, Latin and history.
I don't know the system in Greece today well, but I know Anglophone scholars who regard ancient historians as just philologists who read Livy instead of Lucan and, that may have worked in the 50s, but the field and methods for ancient history are too complex for that today.
Deleted last reply which was grouchier than intended. But Classics is an important home for ancient historians, archaeologists and art historians, and it is frustrating to see hiring for these important positions driven basically by who can teach the Tacitus seminar.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
because same thing here.
Classics Departments, either stop expecting archaeologists, ancient historians, etc. to demonstrate Greek and Latin teaching in job applications, or give those grad students chances to teach them before they get the PhD.
