Analysis Requirements History 102H: Interpreting the European Past

Specifications for all analyses Each analysis is graded pass (40 points) or fail (0 points). Analyses that do not meet the following specs will fail. Analyses that fail may not be revised and resubmitted. Analyses that meet the specs but do not pass the grading categories (see pages 2–3) can be revised until they pass and earn full credit (40 points).

LENGTH: 500-600 words (no more, no less), not including name, title, etc. Parenthetical citations do count toward the wordcount.

QUOTATIONS: A quotation is two or more words borrowed directly from another author. Quotations are not required, and usually it is best to put everything in your own words. If a quotation is absolutely necessary to make your point, no more than ten words can be quoted from the assigned text. This is ten words total for the entire paper, not ten words per quotation. If you copy two or more words from the text but do not put them in quotation marks, it is plagiarism and grounds for failing the analysis. Do not use scare quotes.

CONTENT: You must make a good-faith effort to answer the prompt for each analysis.

OUTSIDE RESEARCH: All ideas must be entirely your own, based on your interpretation of the assigned texts listed in the red box. You may not introduce ideas from the internet or from lectures, videos, or other assigned readings for class.

PLAGIARISM: There are two forms of plagiarism that are grounds for failing an assignment. 1) Paraphrasing plagiarism: this is where you make slight changes to the assigned primary or secondary source, such as substituting synonyms for some words, but you still rely on its language and structure instead of putting an idea entirely in your own words. 2) Outside source plagiarism: this is where you copy ideas from the internet or some other source without giving credit to an author.

FORMAT: Analysis must be saved and submitted as a Microsoft Word file (.doc or .docx)

ASSIGNMENT PROMPTS

Module 1 (primary source): How does Pseudo-Xenophon think an ideal government should function?

Module 2 (primary source): Is Eusebius a biased source for the life of Constantine? Why or why not?

Module 3 (secondary source): Based on the two Taking Sides articles, what is Adrian Goldsworthy’s argument? What is Peter Heather’s argument? Which argument did you find more persuasive?

Module 4 (secondary source): Based on the two Taking Sides articles, what is Margaret King’s argument? What is Joan Kelly-Gadol’s argument? Which argument did you find more persuasive?

Module 5 (primary source): What does Frédéric Bastiat think is the proper relationship between the individual and the state?

Module 6: (secondary source): Based on the two Taking Sides articles, what is Richard Stites’s argument? What is François Navailh’s argument? Which argument did you find more persuasive?

Analysis Requirements page 2

Primary source analyses One of the most important skills that we can learn by studying history is close reading. This means reading between the lines to uncover details about the author’s perspective on a subject, to flesh out unspoken assumptions, and to reveal common knowledge that formed the background and original context for the text. Simply stated, the goal of these primary source analyses is to read a text and then to make an argument about it.

For help understanding how to do a close reading of a primary source, see the close reading sample in the assignments section of Blackboard or stop by my student hours.

Primary source analysis grading categories Your assignment will be evaluated for each of the following categories. If three or more of the following categories are not met, your assignment will be marked “needs