dr. t

Harvard's name will certainly open more non-academic doors, yes.

Nevertheless, history departments don't hire non-historians. So, what do you want to do?

What do you see yourself doing after grad school? History departments don't hire AmStud PhDs.

I would assume you're rejected and they just haven't bothered getting around to letting you know, actually. Academia is often casually cruel like that.

Zombie

Ooof. Brown must be doing something right, because we had double the yield we wanted. Those planning on applying for the next few years beware, as the number of slots is going to go down for a little while.

My anxiety does not need this kthx. Next year is my first year on the market, and I'm about to have my "here's my dissertation, world" conference presentation cut out from under me.

Just a casual note that the median 1br apartment rent near BC is around $2,000/month.

Link it to me and I'll pin it.

She's actually giving you a direct answer, if you know how to listen (and most professors don't actually know how to go down the museum/library branch). If you have *no* languages other than English as a college junior, I am very sorry to say that the ship has sailed when it comes to pursuing graduate level work in ancient history. Any program willing to take you would be doing so solely to exploit you. Even the most mediocre programs would want 2 ancient and 1 modern language when you apply. Heck, without some language skills, you haven't really been doing ancient history, regardless of what it says on the diploma. And even if you do take some post-bacc coursework as suggested above, you're still going to be massively behind any of your competition for a spot at a decent program. When there's only 2-4 jobs posted each year in the field, you can't afford not to go to a decent program. This is not a course you can successfully follow.

The fact that there still exist programs like this in the year of our lord two thousand and twenty...

First, smaller cohorts does not mean more attention. A more attentive adviser means more attention. But you can also be the change you want to see in the world. There was not much of a vertical cohort among the medievalists at my school when I showed up; there is now, but it took a lot of work.

You should definitely have teaching experience. But having a lot of teaching experience will not generally help you more than having some teaching experience, and it will make it harder for you to write a good dissertation.

You mean Insular Studies?

I'm going to temper @TMP's advice slightly: it depends on the VAP or postdoc. Something like the Harvard Society of Fellows is something you should take over a TT job at University of South-Central Alabama's third satellite campus, to give an extreme example.

I mean what are they going to do, un-accept you?

Some searches actually (and horribly) put a limit of ~5 years from degree award on their candidates. You're right that the further you get away from the PhD, the more problems you'll have but it's dependent on what you've been doing. If you've been adjuncting for even 1-2 years, you're probably done; at this point I would discourage anyone from thinking of an adjunct position as a stepping stone to full academic employment. If you've held 2-3 multi-year VAPs, though, you're probably still a viable candidate.

My own hypothesis is that they're less worried about the power of their degree on the other side.

One of my very favorites, along with Adventure Time's "You know, sucking at something is the first step towards being kinda good at something."

Interestingly, at Ivy+ schools, the history major is booming. My department has been adding 1-2 TT professors a year since I got there in 2015.

Absolutely not under any circumstances.

They did when I applied. If acceptances and rejections are out and you haven't heard, expect a MAPSS offer.

Everywhere else, yes. But not at Harvard. Tenure comes with promotion to full.

Same as it ever was. In the hope that those who have ears will hear, @Sigaba has given some very practical advice on how you probably should comport yourself in your department and how you will need to as junior faculty. Be judicious with distributing praise, and restrict any complaints and criticisms to audiences you know and trust absolutely. Assume that any action you take will be reported to someone who doesn't like you and will use that information to harm your career, if they can. As one person put it, "In 95% of academic situations, the correct response is shutting the fuck up. In the other 5%, it's 'That's an interesting idea; I'll have to think about it'." I have watched several colleagues over the years who have refused to listen to similar advice offered to them flounder profoundly; none are currently still in academia. This may seem like overkill. And mostly, it is! The problem is that if you are not good at training yourself to behave in this way, you will neither recognize nor react appropriately in the moments where it matters. For those who have not yet found it, this CHE forum thread is both hilarious and deeply enlightening as to how you should be prepared to behave in academia, as well as the reasons for it.