i'm doing a history phd on thirteenth century politics and robin hood. it's relatively easy, since no one has read all the primary sources and so there's lots of ignored info. if you do medieval, make sure to learn the latin.

I wanted to be an archaeologist, but was put off by the:

1) snobbery.

2) bias towards learning about building foundations and tomb contents.

3) continual bias towards the Eastern Mediterranean and nothing else.

4) continual bias that `true history' is not to be found in contemporary chronicles but building foundations. (vomit)

Just remember, if you are a historian, you have greater flexibility, and you can do classics/archaeology work also. If you're an archaeologist, you're pretty much limited to building foundations, or temples, but usually the said foundations. It's not about history, more architecture and art.

There is a third path, classics. you just learn ancient history without the emphasis on mummies.