• Critical Bibliography for Editors and Book Historians
• Exhibitions: The Art and the Practicalities
• Looking Beyond Texts: Using Copy-Specific Evidence
• Tuition, Accommodation, Application Forms and Further information
• Rare Book 2005

Christopher de Hamel
Illuminated Medieval MSS

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1. Very!
2. Very useful.
3. Fine.
4. Very.
5. Very.
6. Very useful basis for understanding the NZ resources.
7. Very helpful, however books of this subject very hard to come by in the Northern Territory.
8. Relevant, and helpful.
9. Extremely useful. If I had not read them I would have had too much new material to absorb in 5 days.
10. Very useful.
11. n/a.

2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?

1. Yes.
2. Yes, to both, I think.
3. Both.
4. Yes.
5. Absolutely.
6. Yes.
7. Very useful, and will be put to good use back home.
8. Yes - and do provide ongoing sources of reference. The course content was extensive.
9. Yes, both useful at the time, and to refer to in future.
10. Yes to both.
11. Yes.

3) Was the intellectual level of the class appropriate?

1. Absolutely.
2. Yes it was. I was surprised that, with the very diverse range of experience, everyone seemed to get something out of it. I certainly did.
3. Yes.
4. Yes.
5. Yes.
6. Yes: although I was not nearly as experienced as most of the class.
7. Course content was excellent.
8. The group was diverse with wide ranging needs. Generally the level of discussion made provision for all - the lecturing provided depth and challenge, and practical engagement with inks, quills, gold leaf was excellent.
9. Yes.
10. Yes - suited to those with varying levels of knowledge.
11. Yes.

4) Was the instructor well prepared, organized and helpful?

1. Totally.
2. Yes, yes & very.
3. Yes.
4. 4:Yes, extremely. Seldom had such a knowledgeable lecturer.
5. Totally.
6. Very well prepared and well able to adapt to the varied needs of the students.
7. Dr. de Hamel is the consummate professional. A master of his craft, his delivery of all papers this week, his generous giving of his time, talent, wit and knowledge was nothing short of outstanding.
8. Yes. Totally confident, organized and helpful. Questions and discussion was sought and welcomed. He, (Chris), was available to discuss individual questions and worked with and alongside group members.
9. Extremely well prepared/ organized, yet flexible. Very helpful.
10. Yes.
11. Yes.

5)Was the teaching space suitable for the class?

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Adequate.
4. Yes, excellent.
5. Yes.
6. Yes.
7. Yes, venue was excellent.
8. a) Yes - but perhaps lacking adequate ventilation (mid afternoon especially)
   b) Table placement - a centre space would have enabled those farthest away to have an unimpeded view of Chris and the manuscripts.
9. Yes.
10. Yes.
11. Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1. The stimulating enthusiasm of the lecturer.
2. I really enjoyed the direct contact with actual manuscripts and the clever tips on script, dating etc.
3. The absolute absorption and enthusiasm for the subject, transported me into a new world of intrigue. Thank you.
4. Lecturer was superb, incredibly knowledgeable but also an excellent speaker. Learnt many new skills, and was greatly enriched by the course. The course was very well planned - good mix of lecture, slides, and hands-on.
5. Christopher de Hamel is a treasure beyond price. He is a TERRIFIC expert. The Middle Ages live again!
6. The opportunity to see manuscript material at close quarters, to handle rarity of production and begin to see differences.
7. All of it! So much information, on a specialized subject was appreciated.
8. a) The subject matter and content.
   b) The enthusiasm and passion of Christopher de Hamel.
   c) His ability to communicate - to express and deliver lectures in a lively, exciting and interesting manner.
   d) The willingness of Ian Stewart to provide support, access and retrieve resources and to share all information relating to the Reed collection and A. H. Reed from Dunedin Public Library.
9. a) Christopher de Hamel's lively and enthusiastic teaching style.
   b) Opportunity to handle so many and such variety of manuscripts.
   c) Structure of the course -balance of lecturing with slides, practical work and discussion.
10. Mixture of slideshows/ lecturing/ specific topics/ more general topics/ hands on!!!/ group help and discussion.
11. Hard to say, but possibly the lecture on the Rothschilds.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1. Only by spreading it over a longer period!
2. I don't think it could have been!
3. ?
4. Only by having more of it.
5. NOT A JOT.
6. I was satisfied.
7. a) Perhaps a visit to the Hocken Library for those international visitors?
   b) Perhaps a 1/2 days break Wed pm (start early) for shopping, sightseeing.
   c) Tour of Dunedin Public Library & Uni Library.
8. a) Seating re-arrangement when working at two tables.
   b) Provision of Bibliographic Reference list (relating to lectures).
   c) Provision of a list of texts available for reference to the Dunedin Public Library Reed Collection since these books are not catalogued or online.
9. The course itself - only with great difficulty. Some administrative details e.g. the course schedule were too late in arriving, given the time of year.
10. Not possible.
11. I don't think it could be, really.

8) If you attended the Tuesday /and/or Thursday night lectures, were they worth attending?

1. Only went to Tuesday one - excellent.
2. I very much enjoyed the Tuesday one, but I couldn't go to the Thursday one.
3. Yes - perhaps a little distant from manuscripts but interesting.
4. Yes, interesting (both).
5. Mary Ronnie's talk was excellent. This is a good idea. it's great "spin" for the more esoteric discipline; and a good full lecture well worth listening to.
6. Yes.
7. a) Mary Ronnie, what an icon!! A living treasure also very generous with her knowledge, talents and librarianship skills.
   b) Thursday's lecture bored me to sleep!
8. N/A.
9. Attended Mary Ronnie's lecture on Tuesday night. Found it interesting and worthwhile. I had the advantage of local knowledge, but some more audiovisual support in the form of images of some places mentioned (e.g. Naseby, Skippers) might have been useful for visitors.
10. Tuesday - interesting. Book/ library history always of interest and in Dunedin context, didn't go to Thursday.
11. Didn't go to Tues. night lecture. Went to Thurs. lecture--not really my cup of tea, but others seemed to enjoy it.

9) If you stayed at St Margaret's College, how was the housing/food?

1. N/A
2. N/A.
3. Good - courteous kindly staff.
4. Housing excellent, food ok, location excellent. Computers not so good - didn't work for the first few days, and don't know if our passwords were supposed to work on the University library PC's, but they didn't seem to which made homework difficult.
5. Housing fine. Lunch/ Breakfast fine. Had my 1 dinner - it was mediocre.
6. N/A.
7. St. Margaret's housing was great, breakfast food excellent. Dinner meals on whole were ok. One or two below standard!! But on the whole - ok. Computers and internet wasn't working till Thursday, this needs to be addressed in future.
8. N/A.
9. Comfortable facilities in a very convenient location. Food generally good. Internet access was a muddle at first -this could be improved. In terms of value for money, St Margaret's was excellent.
10. Housing - excellent, food - breakfast good, dinner variable. Dinner at 5:30 is a shock to the system - give us time to unwind before eating!
11. Housing OK. Food OK, but I was sick most of the time from a stomach infection possibly picked up elsewhere.