1. A BA at a 'top-tier university' might impress some people, but it's unlikely to impress the professors (who are most crucial). A BA in history is not even the first step in the hierarchical academic ladder. It's the ground floor.

2. What matters most are those professors. Judging by your background, you're going into the classics. Enroll at a university with a top-notch Classics department. Top-notch meaning a department with a qualitative and quantitative output of papers, books, conference presentations, etc.

Why? Because writing good papers for your (under)graduate classes directly supervised by a renowned expert in the field can act, later on, as an indirect 'vote of confidence' when applying for student-assistantships.

3. In the Netherlands, almost all universities with a history department host an independent student's scholarly journal. If a similar thing is around, try to become an editor. You get valuable experience in editing and critiqueing journal submissions and expand your network. You're not going to publish ground breaking work, but you can put it on your CV. In the Netherlands, these journals are acknowledged as proper scholarly journals (although they're far, far, far from A-List) by the scholarly community. Great way to expand your skillset.

4. This might not be applicable to you, but in the Netherlands most Humanities departments run 'student assistant' programmes. These are part-time jobs as either administrative or research assistant. Try to get in those. It boosts your CV, improves your skillset and expands your network.

5. Don't bother with 'original undergrad research'. Or rather: do bother with original undergraduate research for your course papers/essays, but don't bother publishing them. Unless it's absolutely brilliant, it's not going to get published. Instead focus on book reviews. Most journals below the top-tier are often looking for book reviews. It's the easiest way to get published in a journal, and has the added benefit of keeping your own knowledge of a particular area up to date.

6. There are two strategies towards networking. A wide approach, or an depth approach. The former suggests getting to know as many people as possible, the latter suggests getting to know a limited number of people intimately. I'd opt for the latter. It's better to be a protege of an expert, than someone who's somewhat known by many.

7. I don't know if you're into football (the European kind), but conceptualize Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, etc. as the Real Madrids/Paris Saint-Germains/Manchester Cities of the academic world. They tend to import top talent, rather than directly produce it themselves. While a BA/MA at one of those universities is certainly not going to hurt, I would still advise going to a smaller university with an excellent Classics department.

If you want an academic career, you need to know the people and have the CV. "Graduated at Oxbridge" is maybe less important than getting the right connections.

First of all the only thing you really need to be an academic is to be good at it. Get good marks at your undergrad, get onto a post grad program, get good marks (also with good marks you get scholarships/grants and this is a major things). I'm guessing that you are still an undergrad? These things fall into place over time, you do't need a long terms plan, just realise that there are certain basic steps - BA MA PhD (there are other variations). It takes about 7 years - longer if you stretch it out. Do you really know how you will feel about this in 7 years time? The longer you are a university 'insider' you can gauge how the system works and make more informed choices. The only real solid advice I can give now is do your postgrad and undergrad at different unis as it will give you an idea of how different unis operate.

Now about Oxbridge as they seem to be your main concern, I can tell you a recent anecdote. I recently met Polly Low as she was in the middle of hiring new academic staff for the Classics department in Manchester. Jokingly she said that all applicants from Oxbridge were immediately thrown in the bin. I've heard similar stories from Tom Harrison at Liverpool. Obviously they are not serious, however non-Oxbridge unis prefer non-Oxbridge applicants and Oxbridge prefers their own. So better uni does not necessarily mean more job choices.

Also when you get to PhD level (especially if your are in a small field), your supervisor's (and later viva examiner's) reputation counts as much as your university. And even getting through a PhD is largely dependent on your working relationship to your supervisor. Basically, this is a more important choice than your uni.

Languages - If you want to go into Classics then languages are an easy in but not the only one. All departments need Greek and Latin language teachers and its a big job very few others want to do. However there is a reason people don't wan't the job and you don't want to be stuck as 'The Language Teacher.'

Specialisation - do what interests you. You won't do good research if you are not interested in the subject. Yes some topics are more overdone than others but you can figure this out on your own over your undergrad. Working out interesting research questions is part of the job.

As for the third question - Yes, publish and teach when you are doing a PhD. As an undergrad you don't need to worry about this. That is not to say that you should not be pushing yourself to write essays to a publishable quality as it is better to get into good habits early. You can't do much as far as networking goes, just get on with staff and they will know you if your work is good and you do seminar work and the likes. Also if you are doing Classics at Queensland speak to your deputy head, Alastair Blanshard as he is very friendly and approachable.

Hope that helps.

A good school for undergraduate work doesn't hurt if you go further in academia. However, a top tier school doesn't give you so much of an advantage as top flight marks from a decent, accreditted school. In my own discipline there is a general acknowledgment that one or two of the QS top four overaward and that some of the less prestigious institutions regularly produce the strongest undergraduate candidates. I'd take an Essex BA in my discipline over Oxford or Cambridge most days - but in the final analysis at this level the judgments are based on knowledge of individual performance more than anything.

As an undergraduate you can also manage with fairly standard research facilities to be brutally honest. As a doctoral student you want to be where the big libraries and research centres are - London and Boston look pretty unbeatable but of course there are other concentrations just as good and, moreover, you choice will vary by discipline.

Buckle down at QU. If you can get to some international events - a conference or summer school - do it and network even if it's just locally. But make your choice of postgraduate institution carefully because there the reputation of your department and supervisor really do matter more.

Good news, you are from Australia, so you are straight away free from the types of crippling debt issues American college students face.

Second good news, University of Queensland has a pretty decent rep for Classics, at least within Australia. The biggest problem heading overseas is that, unsurprisingly, the UK and US are often very insular and don't really know that much about institutions abroad.

Are you currently an undergrad? Are you then contemplating switching to Oxbridge now, mid degree? This is a little unclear in your post. As I understand it, British citizenship will not, by itself, get you treated as a Home Country student under UK rules, you need to have been resident there for three years. So this is something important to consider. If you are thinking of going there for a PhD, I would try and write to admissions now and find out about how you will be considered for funding/scholarship issues, essentially you want a strong enough BA (Hons) and attendant achievements that you shouldn't pay for your PhD.

1. It's a bit difficult to pick between French and German without working out where you will head within Classics. Either would be useful. I would just pick one and go with it. French, at least, is a Romance language and will be slightly related to Latin.

2. The problem with moving into (A)NE studies is that it almost requires you to head in a different direction now, unless you were thinking the Roman East. But NE studies will possibly require other languages. The issue with Byzantine studies is that there are even less jobs, worldwide.

3. What sort of academic work are you interested in? Primarily teaching? research? IN which country? These are questions you also need to ask. The US market is a very, very different beast. Everything you listed and more is something you need to keep in mind.

Already a lot of good advice in this thread.