Historiographic Essay help?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You mean they were a nation, but didn't know it?

Of course they knew it. Their Kings spoke of it. The people, while they never saw or knew much of the men on the other side of the realm, knew it existed and that they were part of the same realm.

You set kingdom or realm=nation? I disagree with this approach, one reason I already posted (loyalty towards persons rather than to an idea like "nation"), and the stuff I read for Germany does not support your view (I can tell you the book if you like, it is by a German historian named Volker Scior, in German however, no idea if it's available in English too).

I admit I'm not an expert in English history, but for the moment I doubt that Alfred had much of an idea about nation (opposed to "kingdom" or "rule") and this idea played a role in his communication with his people.

[Ninot]

I think Alfred had an idea of nation, as his works might show, but I doubt his people did.

[Zkribbler]

Re: Historiographic Essay help?

Originally posted by Ninot
My Teacher Assistant said she was going to help me but it looks like she forgot about me.

Hold the phone!! Okay, she might have forgotten about you temporarily, but her job is to help you. Don't let her forget about you! Demand your education! Get in her face (in a nice way, of course ), but take the inititive. Set up an appointment to meet with her. etc.

[Sava]

is she hot?

[Ninot]

Re: Re: Historiographic Essay help?

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Hold the phone!! Okay, she might have forgotten about you temporarily, but her job is to help you. Don't let her forget about you! Demand your education! Get in her face (in a nice way, of course ), but take the inititive. Set up an appointment to meet with her. etc.

She actually answered my email this morning.

She was helpful, but kinda 2 days late

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Sava
is she hot?

hmm, think Rosy O'Donnel, but blonde, and not annoying.

I know, i kinda got away from the original example alot there.

[Sava]

more cushion for the pushin'

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ninot
I think Alfred had an idea of nation, as his works might show, but I doubt his people did.

Indeed, but it only really matters what Alfred, and the intellectuals of the era, thought.

[GePap]

Ninot:

He propelled the people towards their own unique identity, led the population with ability in a time of opportune circumstance, and defended his people against the war weary pillaging Danes, and thus he is reflected upon as a great king.

is in my view not a particularly well written thesis. For example, are weary danes, even pillaging ones, that much of a threat? After all, they are weary (or that at least is what your sentence says). Personally, the sentence is too busy and crowded.

Besides, what is the point? IIRC historiographical essays are about HOW history was written, the process of history, not the fracts themselves. So to state his specific achievements in the thesis statement might not be the best. And what sources are you critiquing anyways? THe historians of the date? We are to assume by your statement that the chroniclers of the day praised Alfred? Or is this about later historians?

In writing a thesis, you point has to be very clear. If need be, put supporting facts in other sentences and refer to them in the thesis sentence. For example:

KIng Alfred led the Saxons during a very critical stage in their history. HIs skillful defense against the Danes and the bounty during his reign (this is what I assume you mean by opportune circumstances) helped propel the creation of an independent Saxon identity. Due to the achievements during his reign KIng Alfred was judged by chroniclers of [X date](whatever historians you are discussing) to be a great king.

obviously, the actual thesis is bolded. If this is a proper historiographical essay though, why king Alfred was seen as a great king as much to do with the events during the life of the chroniclers as it does with what he did, which is why it would be helpful to know what age the chroniclers were from.

[Ninot]

Before I started GePap, i agreed with what you put for your rewrite of my thesis, however....

my Prof and TA have specificly instructed us to write our Thesis as some kind of argumentative point, and not to talk about the sources.

I would think you to be right, but write to the demands of the prof

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ninot
Before I started GePap, i agreed with what you put for your rewrite of my thesis, however....

my Prof and TA have specificly instructed us to write our Thesis as some kind of argumentative point, and not to talk about the sources.

I would think you to be right, but write to the demands of the prof

Three issues:

1.What is the arguement? A thesis should have one single arguement in it. IN your original thesis you had several, mainly due to the fact that one could decide to argue whether Alfred did help begin the creation of a Saxon identity, or argue that he is seen as a good king, or both. So my question to you is, what is your arguement? That historians see him as a good king? That he helped create a Saxon identity? Both? That should drive the thesis statement.

2. When I asked about sources, I directed the question towards your statement that this was a historiographical essay. I guess at this point I am not clear enough on what exactly this essay is meant to convey in general. IN general a thesis statement should not do anything BUT state your arguement. YOu wouldn't talk about sources there, unless the relation of the evidence to sources was an integral part in and of itself of your point.

3. I still think both of the sentences you laid out are too busy, too many points. After all, the whole paragraph in which the thesis sentence lies is there for the supporting statements to your thesis.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ninot
my Prof and TA have specificly instructed us to write our Thesis as some kind of argumentative point, and not to talk about the sources.

I would think you to be right, but write to the demands of the prof

I'm having a hard time jiving that with historiography.

Perhaps you are doing the 'new math' version.

[Ninot]

We are to specify sources and the historiographical part within the introduction, but not in the main thesis statement.

[notyoueither]

So you're going to cite Poly?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ninot
We are to specify sources and the historiographical part within the introduction, but not in the main thesis statement.

Well, obviously. But stating that historians came to regard someone as X is not mentioning sources, it is making an arguement, since of course you would have to give evidence eventually that this is so and that historians did believe such and such.