How to Prepare for an Oxford History Interview

Introduction

The Oxford History Interview is the last Oxford-specific hurdle an applicant must face. When you have got to the interview, you have already made your UCAS application and done your written work. A-levels remain a final test of your abilities, but at the time of the interview, they are still a distant prospect. Moreover, A-levels can far more easily be revised for. Learn essay technique and AO1 knowledge and you’re most likely to get an A or A*. Oxford claims that one cannot prepare for the interviews. They are a test of your out-of-the-box thinking skills. They are designed to take you out of your historical comfort zone. Say “goodbye” to familiar content and “hello” to obscure inscriptions, coins, works of art and excerpts from ancient texts, as well as unexpected questions such as “if you could go back in time to witness any historical event, which would it be?” Indeed, it is true that one cannot “revise” for an Oxford interview. You cannot memorise every single coin ever minted, every inscription carved, or artwork made. This is an impossibility. However, this article aims to demonstrate that an inability to “revise” is not the same as an inability to “prepare”. If you're wondering exactly what Oxford history tutors are looking for in applicants before you even reach the interview stage, I've written a separate article exploring that question in more detail. First, however, I think it important to go over some common myths about the Oxford Interview process as well as what not to do.

Some Common Interview Myths and What Not to Do

When I first started thinking about one day applying to Oxford, I spoke to my elder brother, who was a student there, about interviews. He told me a story, which he said was most likely an urban legend, about one Oxford applicant entering their interview and simply being asked to “surprise” their interviewer. Improvising, they pulled a lighter out of their pocket and set fire to the table. The interviewer was indeed surprised, and the person was offered a place. This story is almost certainly false. Unorthodox questions do occur, but they tend to be relevant to the degree you are applying for. I can confirm that arson is not encouraged. However, what this extreme story demonstrates is that there is a mythos surrounding Oxford interviews. Many candidates harbour the belief that Oxford is “different” and thus become determined to stand out and be “different”. However, this can cause serious damage to an application. I know of two interview stories in which a student, trying to appear unorthodox, torpedoed their chances of success.

The first I heard of was during my own year of application for Ancient and Modern History to Oxford. A student posted on a forum that they had received 88 on the HAT (a very good score) and yet did not get an offer. They hypothesised that the reason for their refusal was that they had told the interviewers that their questions were not very good and then suggested alternative “better” lines of questioning. To be arrogant in your interview, placing yourself above the world-class academics assessing you is not wise. Given such an exceptional HAT score, it is difficult not to wonder whether this exchange counted against them. Whatever the exact reason, the story illustrates that being confrontational or trying to outsmart your interviewers is unlikely to help your case. In today’s post-HAT world, the value of the interview has only grown, meaning such an approach would be even more damaging. Indeed, in the HAT era, interviews counted as 40% of an application, but now they’re worth 45% for both history and AMH applications.

The second such story I was told during my first term as an undergraduate by a tutor of mine. He told me that he had asked the question “Why did you choose Ancient and Modern History rather than just History? What is it about the ancient world that so appeals to you?” The applicant replied that he thought the ancient world was a better place because Spaniards and Turks weren’t allowed to marry back then. He said this when his two interviewers had a Spanish and Turkish surname respectively. Why xenophobia was his go-to approach beats me, but my tutor told me he suspected it was because he wanted to inflict shock value. The applicant’s plan was to leave a lasting impression, and thus, he hoped to secure a place. However, it transpired that xenophobia was not a method to guarantee Oxford success, and he was rejected. What is even more amusing, of course, is that the ancient world was a cultural melting pot, where issues like racism were nowhere near as severe as they are today. Someone from Roman Spain could marry someone from Roman Egypt, or even a Turkic nomad who had perhaps migrated into the Roman Empire. Thus, this applicant’s claim was not only offensive, but also historically incorrect, further consigning him to the pile of interview rejects.

So How Can One Prepare?

One obvious way to prepare is through mock interviews. These aren't the only route, but they do allow you to practise thinking aloud under pressure. While Oxford does indeed assess out-of-the-box thinking skills, these are, like any skill, things that can be practised and thus enhanced. However, preparation isn't limited to mock interviews. You can also develop your historical curiosity about more than just events by engaging with artefacts. Think about the provenance of an item, and why its maker made it. For example, we all know the Taj Mahal was meant to be a beautiful tomb for Shah Jahan’s late wife Mumtaz, but why did he choose that architectural style? These questions, which do, of course, have historical answers (think the Timurid legacy within the Mughal dynasty), are exactly what you should be asking yourself to push your thinking further. My history interview question (for modern history) was about an eighth century Anglo-Saxon gold coin. What made this coin so fascinating was that it carried the inscription “Muhammad is the Prophet of God” on it in upside down Arabic. I was asked what I made of the coin. After this discussion took up over half the interview, the remaining time was spent discussing my personal statement – my research project in particular. Thus, for an interview like mine, a good way to prepare would have been to engage with material evidence and think of what it reveals, while ensuring that the content I discussed in my personal statement was something I was passionate about and had maintained a good understanding of. Therefore, my recommendation to any reader who does not wish to be tutored for the interviews, is to immerse yourself in material culture – coins, art, and buildings – and to make certain that your personal statement is an accurate reflection of you as a historian in the making. Your written work can also be challenged, so remember what you submitted and think over that essay, as well as possible arguments you did not include courtesy of limits on both time and word count.

As I have already hinted at in my discussion of arrogance in an interview, humility and being teachable is also important. Interviewers don’t expect you to know everything. Your answers needn’t be correct, but they ought to demonstrate historical creativity. Tutors want you to be teachable; they want you to be willing to engage with new ideas, respond to questions, and refine your thinking. You can, and are in fact encouraged to, ask questions about the source you are analysing. An interview should be a conversation, not an exam. They are testing your historical curiosity and your ability to interact with them in a one-to-one teaching environment. They want to turn you into an Oxford historian. The interview is your first taste of the tutorial system that will shape you to that end.

Conclusion

The ultimate purpose of history interviews at Oxford is to assess your abilities to think outside the box when confronted with unfamiliar historical material. A mysterious, seemingly Islamic coin from 8th century England is not something you would have come across in your A-levels. As it is only one coin of billions minted in human history, you cannot revise its provenance, but if you become familiar with numismatic ideas, it can help you think about coins in a different, more enlightened way. Artworks can often be evocative of power or piety, and once more, studying several such items can enhance your thinking skills. Do not, however, be swept away by focusing on one discipline. You might get a coin; you might not. Also remind yourself of what you wrote in both your personal statement and your written work as both could be scrutinised.

The applicants who enjoy Oxford interviews are rarely those who know the most facts. They're usually the ones who become genuinely curious when confronted with something unexpected. If you can learn to treat the interview as an opportunity to explore rather than an examination to survive, you've already gone a long way towards preparing well.