The research paper differs in form and content from a report. Research requires verifiable interpretation of sources.  A report, like an encyclopedia article, simply imparts information, or worse, hides necessary debate through assertion. In the research paper, we analyze eyewitness-sources from the past to approach an answer to Leopold von Ranke's question:  "What was it really like?" Historical inquiries into the complex human past can seldom impart information as Truth, but rather will sift various sources to argue for one case or another as the most likely scenario of "what it was really like."  This method of evaluating primary sources introduces reader and researcher, as far as is possible, to those who literally lived and acted during the time in question.  Secondary sources, on the other hand, bring out important ideas and issues related to the topic and to those primary sources.

     Your paper should fill about 7-8 typewritten, double-spaced pages. While you may use any standard method of citation, I suggest the Chicago Manual of Style. Include a title page with your name but no other covers/folders.  Please number each page.  Plagiarism will result in a grade of 'F' on the paper.  Submit two copies and I will return one with comments; I keep one copy on file.  The paper is due on the penultimate class day (not counting the exam day).

       NOTE THIS, please: If you feel you must depart from the guidelines given here, then you must consult with me during office hours, so that between us, we can keep the paper on track.  I repeat: if you do not make a Reilly-chapter the center of your primary-source research, and the Kagan text the beginning of your secondary-source research, let me know so that I can try to help find good sources for you. To fail to do so is to fail.   

        Begin by skimming Riley to find a chapter and/or theme that you find interesting and that has the requisite primary source. Then:

      1.) Center on your interest;
      2.) Get control of the context in a textbook or two (library).
      3.) Master each primary source in Riley and any commentary and/or secondary source that appears;
      4.) Think: What questions appear that you think are worth addressing?
      5.) Note down all, e.g., agreements and/or disagreements in both primary and secondary source contexts in Riley.
      6.) Go to the library and find a more secondary sources and repeat the above process.
     7.) This research will make plain if and how much more primary-source material you need to do this project well, and the secondard sources usually list their primary sources: Find these primary sources and incorporate this evidence. Write a conclusion. Proof-read. Edit. Finish it.

       Think through what each piece of evidence means in terms of your inquiry. Constructing a paper takes time, effort, reading and thinking. Then present your thinking clearly in the paper. Your critical interpretation of the evidence and the conclusions that flow from it provide fascinating activity for our minds now, and will help to prepare our minds, I hope, for life's future questions and problem-solving in a rational, systematic way.

     For more on help and tips on writing history papers, click the mm logo (to my homepage) and check out the two links at the top (left & right images) when you arrive.