Course Requirements (Fall 2000)
Required Books (available for sale at the
UNCG bookstore):
Marc Bloch, Feudal Society,
2 vols., trans. L.A. Manyon (Chicago, 1961)
ISBN (vol. 1): 0226059782
ISBN (vol. 2): 0226059790
Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie,
Montaillou:
the Promised Land of Error (Vintage Books,1979) ISBN: 0394729641
Steven Ozment, The Reformation
in the Cities: the Appeal of Protestantism to Sixteenth-Century Germany
and
Switzerland (Yale UP, 1975) ISBN 0300024967
Robert Darnton, The Great
Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History (New York,
1984)
ISBN 0394729277
Carole Levin, The Heart
and Stomach of a King: Elizabeth I and the Politics of Sex and Power
(U. Pennsylvania Press, 1994) [0812215338]
Charles Nauert, Humanism
and the Culture of Renaissance Europe (Cambridge U.P., 1995) [0821407249]
note: all of these books are available on the internet at www.amazon.com
All other required readings will be available in the Reserve Room of
Jackson
Library.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Oral Presentations:
Each week I would like one of you to open our discussion with a brief
resume of what you've read, what issues the works seems to pose, what conflicts
they create, what methods they use, and whatever else you feel is relevant.
You should come prepared with an outline of what you want to say, and be
prepared to spend about 10 minutes introducing the discussion. Don't
feel that you need to cover every possible ground; rather, you should see
your role as an MC, identifying the issues, problems, arguments, and assumptions
that we will then discuss together. Of course since you have the spotlight,
you can get first licks (or first kudos) in as well ... I will collect
your outline and grade it and your introduction on a simple check, check-minus,
and check-plus system. I anticipate that each of you will probably get
to introduce 2 discussions.
2. Written Work:
One of the major goals of this class is to gain experience writing
critically about history. And since it is a graduate class, I will
expect you to do a fair amount of writing. Although I will ask you to write
three kinds of essay for me, I am going to allow you substantial leeway
in how you decide to structure your written work. What this really
means is that I am going to give you responsibility for choosing your own
schedule, within certain guidelines.
All students must complete the following written work
a. Four short book reviews, typed, of two pages in length
b.Four short analytical essays, typed, of 3-4 pages in length
c. One longer historiographical essay on the (or a) field of your own interest
GRADE BREAKDOWN:
Oral Presentations: 10%
Four Book Reviews 30%
Four Analytical Essays 30%
One Historiographical Essay 30%
EXPLANATION OF WRITING ASSIGNMENTS
a. Book Reviews
A book review is something vastly different from a book report.
A book report "reports" on the content of the book; it is essentially descriptive.
A book review criticizes the book; that is to say that it only briefly
summarizes the content of the book before proceeding to discuss the books'
strengths and/or weaknesses. Keep in mind that these should be short
(2 pages) and concise; the "formula" I used to use (although clearly no
formula ever works for everyone) was to briefly describe the topic of the
book and its major thesis (or theses) in the first paragraph. In
the first paragraph I would also make my judgment about the book.
This first paragraph should be short, no more than 1/3 of the first page
of the review. You should proceed from there to brief paragraphs
that analyze important strengths and/or weaknesses of the argument, method,
assumptions, and/or use of evidence. A final one- or two-sentence
paragraph summarizing your judgment of the book's utility should complete
the review. Should you have further questions about the format of
such essays, come talk to me and/or consult the review section of any major
historical journal (Speculum, American Historical Review, Journal of Modern
History, Sixteenth-Century Studies, etc.).
Book reviews are to be typed, with standard fonts and margins, and no more than 2 pages in length.
Please note: you must write four (4) book reviews. I require everyone
to write a review of Le Roy Ladurie's Montaillou, but it is up to you to
choose the other three books that you will review. I suggest you
make a schedule early in the semester of the weeks in which you will write
book reviews, the weeks you will write analytical essays, and the weeks
you will be preparing your historiographical essay. Here are the
options for book reviews:
Required Book reviews:
Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Montaillou
Other Possible Book Reviews
(you must write on four of the following):
Hodges and Whitehouse
Bloch
Bynum
Bell
Nauert
Levin
Bassnet
Ozment
Diefendorf
Beik
Henshall
Darnton
Chartier
Hunt, The Family Romance...
b. Analytical Essays
You will write four (4) of these essays over the course of the semester.
They should be 3-4 pages in length, typed, with standard margins, etc.
I require everyone to write two of the four for weeks 2 and 3. It
is up to you to choose the subject and date of your other analytical essays.
These essays will be reactions to questions I have posed to you concerning a particular set of readings. I expect you to formulate a clear, well-supported argument that answers my question one way or another. Remember to be concise. State your argument in a brief opening paragraph, and then proceed to introduce evidence and commentary that supports your position. I should hasten to say that the evidence for whatever argument you make should derive primarily for the readings assigned for that week.
Required Analytical Essays:
Week 2: "What does the Annales
paradigm have to offer the historical profession?"
Week 3:"In the aftermath
of the fragmentation of the discipline of history, what does it mean
‘to do history'?"
Possible Analytical Essays (choose 2 of the following):
Week 5: "Which is a more
persuasive historical framework, the concept of ‘feudalism' or the concept
of
‘feudal society'? Why?"
Week 10: "How does (or should)
the concept of gender affect the writing of biography?"
Week 12: "Should we abandon
the term absolutism?"
Week 13: "Is there a necessary
connection between crowds and violence?"
Week 15: "A
wit has said that there are as many French Revolutions as there are Frenchmen.
How do the week's
readings support or contradict this quip?"
c. Historiographical Essay (due Monday, December 18, by Noon)
This is to be an 8-12 page examination of a historical topic, issue,
or event of interest to you. As a minimum, I expect you to consult
3 books and 3 articles relevant to the subject of your paper. I will
be happy to suggest beginning bibliography to anyone who needs advice.
I am concerned to see you do several things: a) propose, develop, and support an argument; b) recognize and evaluate differing and potentially competing historical arguments (ie., wrestle with ‘historiography'); c) discuss and interpret relative methodological approaches to the subject at hand. This paper SHOULD NOT BE a ‘standard' historical treatment of the subject. That is, if you chose to examine the crusades, I don't want to read about when and why the crusades began, how they took place, etc; what I want to read about is your evaluation of the methodologies that historians have used to examine the crusades, as well as your assessment of the relative merits of several historians' opinions (ie., historiography).
You have three options in choosing the topic for your essay
i. You may elect one of the following topics:
the Fall of the Roman Empire
medieval ‘feudalism'
gender and religion (whether in the Middle Ages, Renaissance, or Early
Modern Period)
Inquisition and Heresy
Civic Ritual and Identity
periodization issues, such as "the Middle Ages" vs. ‘the Renaissance"
Popular Culture vs. High Culture (in whichever period you choose)
The New Cultural History (in whichever period)
Literacy and Literate Culture
Violence
Absolutism or Constitutionalism
The Role of the State (in whichever period)
Religion and Politics (in whichever period)
The French Revolution
Marxism
Social History
ii. You could write an essay about a particular historian.
For instance, if you enjoyed Bloch's Feudal Society, you might
elect to write a historigraphy essay on Bloch. I would certainly
not expect you to read all of Bloch's work, but I would expect you to compose
a bibliography of his work, to see what his intellectual and academic interests
were, to learn a little about him as a person (there's an excellent biography
of Bloch who, incidentally, was executed by the Nazis in 1944 as a member
of the French Resistance), etc. Your challenge here would be to come
up with an analytical category within which to discuss and criticize Bloch's
work as a historian. Here, too, you must learn to ‘gut' books; skim
for approach, method, and sources.
iii. You may come up with a topic of your own choosing (subject to my
approval).
Please note that any topic must include a) some examination of methodology,
and b) some discussion of historiography.