Requesting Critisism

[Demson]

At the moment, I'm creating a paper on the Celts and Romans. I've been intrigued with history since an early age and thought I should do something constructive with it. The paper is part of a bigger project to study Celts/Romans. I haven't had much oppertunity yet to work on it, but I expect this to change the coming summer. As I also need to make an paper for my English teacher (also a hobbiest historian), my paper will serve this purpose too.

 

Read about it here.

 

Goal: to inform.

Subject: Ancient societies (Imperial Roman and La Tene-period Celtic).

Content: The differences between the Celtic and Roman societies.

Public: hobbiest historians, English teacher.

 

Structure:

 

I will explain the differences according to twin statements. One statement will explain the Roman manner, the other the Celtic.

 

After the statement, I will give explanation.

 

I will also give proof of the statement through examples.

 

 

The reason why I'm posting this is twofold:

 

Considering the immense knowledge of UNRV's collected minds, I though it would be wise to ask for input here thoughout the coming process of writing All I have at present is a plan-of-action, but I intend to work on it regurly throughout the coming weeks.

 

I also thought this would interest fellow information junks. So, be interested.

 

I intend to work on this regurly throughout the coming weeks.

[Primus Pilus]

Interesting sunject matter Demson. I personally have a difficult time excluding cultural/societal 'achievement' when reviewing history, and it tends to slant my opinion. I'll look forward to reading your analysis.