The essay portion of the midterm

The essay portion of the midterm is worth 50 points. You will choose one question to answer from a list of five. The topics of these questions will be:

1. Origins of the French Revolution
2. The influence of "the crowd" (this includes violence or the threat of violence, as well as demonstrations, the burgeoning popular movement, etc.)
3. The political spectrum in the National Assembly (conservative, moderate, liberal/radical)
4. Constitutionalism and the nature of rights
5. Royal power
   

Remember that these are just the topics from which I will draw my questions. When you're taking the midterm, make sure you answer my specific question. For instance, don't just write everything you remember about the origins of the French Revolution without really addressing the question I asked.

Your best bet for studying is to choose one of these topics as soon as possible. Then make sure you know the lecture notes and associated reading for those topics as best you can by next Monday. I will expect to see evidence that you have done the reading, both from Popkin and the Mason & Rizzo reader. Just stringing the lecture notes together in prose form will not earn you an 'A.' You need to bring in some details from the Popkin textbook to provide context for your essay. You also need to demonstrate that you've kept up with reading the documents. Of course I will not expect you to be able to quote the primary sources from memory. But I will expect that you get the gist of the primary sources you've read. You don't have to try to cite all the documents in your midterm essay, but you do need to make at least passing references to the relevant documents. For instance, if you chose to write about constitutionalism and the nature of rights, I would expect you to include some discussion of What is the Third Estate? This is why taking some cursory notes on the primary sources pays off -- it makes your studying that much easier.

A good essay requires an introduction with a clear thesis statement (what will you be arguing?), several paragraphs of supporting evidence, and an adequate conclusion. An essay must contain no fewer than five full paragraphs. An introduction or conclusion which simply restates the question does not count as a full paragraph. Likewise, two sentences do not a paragraph make. When in doubt, err on the side of writing too much.

You might find it helpful to take a couple of moments during the exam to sketch out a rough outline before writing your exam. You can use the paper on which the test is printed to jot down some points you want to be sure to include in the essay.

Be sure to choose a question for which you can offer specific facts in support of your argument. Make sure that your essay answers the question I have posed and that you are explaining why something developed as it did.

I won't grade your midterm essays with the same sort of rigor I would use to grade your papers. However, I will expect clear and thoughtful responses that are on point. Essays that are too vague or fail to explain "why" will be penalized. This last point is critical. Try to avoid writing "this happened, then this, then this..." There are reasons these things happened and you should be able to explain them. Make sure you have adequate transitions from one point to the next.

Studying for the identification section of the midterm

• You will choose five terms to identify from a list of ten. Each ID will be worth 10 points, for a possible total of 50 points.
• In a paragraph, you should include several details and explain the significance of the term.
• When considering significance, think about the changes brought about by the person/event/concept or what the term represents in terms of historical development. When you think of the narrative of the Revolution, what does the term tell us about a specific moment in time? If you look back through your notes, you should notice that I often say things like "This was significant because..." However, I also expect that you can recognize some of these developments and patterns yourself.
• All of terms in the ID section will come from your lecture notes. That's not to say that what you've read can't help you answer the question, only that I won't include terms from the reading that we had not also discussed in class.
• Certain people, documents, events, and manageable concepts are all fair game for the ID section. To give you some idea of range: Louis XVI is too big for an ID, but Calonne isn't. Popular sovereignty is too broad a concept for the IDs, but the suspensive veto isn't.
• Points will be deducted for failing to identify the significance of the term, missing details and factual errors. I will only write "significance," "details," or "errors" to explain why you lost points. If you want a more in-depth explanation, please make an appointment to see me during office hours. In the past, I have tended to essentially re-write people's answers and that makes the grading take too long.
• In terms of "missing details" -- I don't expect you to include every last detail about a term, but there are some details that should stand out to you. These are details which, if left unsaid, would detract from your explanation. For example, you don't have to remember that Necker was Swiss, but I'd have a problem if you forgot he was Comptroller-General.
• When you're studying, you have to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. There are several times that I have mentioned things as asides -- fun facts, bits of trivia, etc. -- and these shouldn't be given as much importance as more serious details. You only have a paragraph, so you need to get to the heart of the matter quickly. The best example I can give actually comes from my Western Civ classes. I would routinely include Macchiavelli's The Prince as an ID term. Far too often, students would write about how he had been imprisoned, how this work was his attempt to get back in the good graces of the Medici family, etc. They would include all those details, see that they had about a paragraph, and then maybe include one line about what Machiavelli's work was about and why it was significant. This is what I mean by the wheat and the chaff. Make sure you focus on the term and why it's important; save the tangential details and background info for the essay question (or the contestant search for Jeopardy!.)

Citation style

For those of you unfamiliar with the use of footnotes, please refer to the "quick guide" to The Chicago Manual of Style. Remember to use the humanities format (notes and bibliography); though for your essays, you do not need to include a bibliography as long as you cite properly in the footnotes.

Use footnotes, not endnotes. Do not use parenthetical notation. The number of the footnote comes at the end of a sentence, after all punctuation.

Remember that you must use citations even when you are paraphrasing a document. The penalty for plagiarism is severe, so if you are unclear about what requires citation, consult a style manual, the Writing Center, or me.

More writing advice

Spelling and grammar

• Know the difference between there, their, and they're, as well as to, too, and two. Spell-check won't catch these mistakes.
• Similarly, know the difference between it's and its. As a rule of thumb, one shouldn't use contractions in academic papers, so you should never have cause to write "it's."
• Know the difference between "accept" and "except," as well as between "affect" and "effect." You must proofread carefully to catch these mistakes.
  
• "Led" is the past tense of "lead."
• Don't end sentences with prepositions.
• Proofread to make sure you have subject-verb agreement.
• History is a study of past events, so make sure you use the proper verb tense.

Syntax

• Start a new paragraph when you're introducing a new idea.
• Proofread to make sure you're not writing run-on sentences. Reading your paper aloud is a good way to catch that sort of mistake; you should recognize immediately that the sentence just doesn't sound right.
• Reading aloud is also helpful for catching awkward syntax. This was one of my most common critiques. I cannot possibly list all the examples, but I think if you heard them, you would realize that there are some convoluted distortions of English grammar going on out there. Strangely, it seems like a lot of the problems with awkward syntax occur when you think "It will sound more sophisticated if I write it like this..." Sometimes simple is better.
  
• Italicize or underline titles of sources. The occasions on which you put a title in quotation marks include when you're citing an article in a journal, an essay in a book, or a source that was not intended to be published in its own right (such as a letter).
• Use Roman numerals when designating rulers' names. It's Louis XVI, not Louis the sixteenth.
• Do not use the first-person case in academic writing. This means no "I think..." or "We shall see..." You are supposed to be making an argument, so assume an authorial voice.
• Watch overuse of the passive voice. "The Estates General was convoked by Louis XVI." sounds weaker than "Louis XVI convoked the Estates General." When you proofread your papers, check how often you use the words "was" and "were." Sometimes those are absolutely the right words to use, but they are often found in sentences that could be converted easily into the active voice, as in the example above.

Citations

• You must use footnotes, not endnotes and certainly not parenthetical notation. There will be a penalty for improper citations.
• Every word processing program has an "insert footnotes" function. You should not be writing the number of the notes in parentheses after the sentence. The footnote number will appear as superscript.
• Footnote numbers are consecutive starting from 1. Even if you are using the same source in the third note as you did in the first, you do not use the number 1 again.
• Citations should be in the humanities style of The Chicago Manual of Style. If you find this too formidable, you may use the Turabian style guide. No other styles will be accepted without penalty.
• Use the Latin abbreviation Ibid. for consecutive citations from the same source. The word must be capitalized, italicized, and end with a period. For instance, say you have three citations in a row from your textbook. We'll call it Tackett, and a span of pages from 100 to 105. For the first footnote, you would write out the complete citation, including page numbers. If your second footnote was from the same source, say page 101, you would write Ibid., 101 -- that's it. Same for the third note, Ibid. and the page number. (If you are citing from an on-line source, you don't have to worry about a page number.) As soon as you cite from a new source, though, you don't use the abbreviation again. If you had three Tackett citations, a citation from another source, then another Tackett citation, you would have to use the short title form for the fifth footnote (Tackett, When the King Took Flight, 103.) This is all laid out in the CMS and Turabian, but ask me if you're still not clear.
• You do not have to cite my lectures, but you must cite your textbooks.
• When you cite a primary source from Mason & Rizzo, you must start the citation with the author and title of the original source. Again, this is covered in both style guides.
• When citing from on-line sources, start the citation with the author and title of the original source. Remember to cite the website (as explained in the style guides); do not just cite the source from which the website manager got the document. You didn't go look up those texts, so you can't cite it as if you did. You must make it clear that you got the information from a website.

General comments

• Make sure you answer the questions! Many students write about the topic mentioned in the question without actually answering it. Be sure to read the questions carefully. If you don't understand the questions, ask me.
  
• When you're citing facts, whether to prove a point or to establish context, learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. These are relatively short papers and a lot of space gets burned up by facts which aren't particularly germane to the argument. Irrelevant information detracts from your argument.
• Beware of using faulty logic in making your arguments. I've seen a lot of tautologies and straw men used in student papers, which seriously diminish the credibility of your argument.

Re-scheduling the Tackett discussion

As I mentioned in class on Wednesday, I don't think we'll be able to discuss Tackett during a normal class time; we really need to move along (and hopefully get the king overthrown before the midterm). However, I may be able to schedule another time for us to talk about the book. Some of you might find this useful before writing your papers.

This is by no means a requirement, though, and I will only offer the extra discussion session if there is sufficient interest in doing so. If you're interested, let me know by commenting here. In your comment, also give me some idea of when you would be available (or better yet, just include the days and times that are out of the question for you).

Enjoy your spring break!

Guidelines about writing style

• Do not write in the first-person.
• Do not use slang or colloquialisms.
• Do not use clever or "cutesy" language. Being creative with one's prose is fine, but don't waste space trying to be funny or sardonic. That's not the appropriate tone for academic writing.
• Avoid using the word "very." It actually weakens your sentences, because it sounds like special pleading. I find this word crops up far too often in student papers. The worst offense? Saying something is "very unique." This is what I mean by weakening a sentence. Something is either unique or it is not. Avoid using such filler words.
• Similarly, mind how often you use the words "always" and "never." "Often" and "rarely" are usually more precise. I think people use words like "always" and "never" to try to make their point more strongly, but if the usage is not actually correct, then it just looks like you don't really understand what you're discussing.
• There seems to be a common problem of broad generalizations and vague language. Be specific when you're making a point. Make sure you're explaining why something happened. Give examples to prove your points. Make explicit connections. Remember, these are argumentative papers, so proofread them and ask yourself, "How clearly have I made my point? How much evidence and explanation have I used to support my argument?"

Basic paper guidelines

• Your papers should be five to seven pages long. (One sentence on page 5 does not equal five pages, though. On the other hand, I don't want your papers to exceed seven pages.)
• Papers should be double-spaced, in a standard 12-point font, with one-inch margins.
• Papers must be stapled; please do not use paper clips or report covers. (There's a stapler on the front desk @ Fenwick if you need one.)
• Citations must be in the form of footnotes or endnotes. Do not use parenthetical notation. Beyond that, the specifics of your citation form don't concern me, as long as you remain consistent.
• Papers are due at the beginning of class on Monday, March 30. Coming in with your paper at the end of the class period will result in a penalty for lateness. The penalty for late papers is one-third of a letter grade per day (e.g., an A- becomes a B+). Since there are no gradations in the 'D' range, however, a 'D' paper would become an 'F.'
• Remember that plagiarism is grounds for failure in the course. If you have some concerns about what constitutes plagiarism, consult your student handbook or contact me.
  

Class canceled, 3/2

Since the university isn't opening until 12:30 today, I'm canceling class. I don't see the point in everyone trudging through the snow for a half-class.

I will be lecturing about the Jacobins and Feuillants on Wednesday. The fate of the Tackett discussion is undecided. (Though you should still have the book finished by the time you get back from spring break.)

Questions for the Tackett paper

Choose three of the sets of questions below and answer them in your paper. (Note: this does not mean three questions total; for each of the numbered sets below, you'll answer all the questions in that set.)

1. How had the people of Varennes and the surrounding areas been affected by the Revolution prior to the King's arrival? Were they more agitated than other French people at the time of the King's appearance? Why or why not? Once the royal family's disguise was unmasked, what factors made it difficult for the townspeople to decide quickly what to do? (That is, what considerations informed the arguments for and against letting the king proceed?)
2. Considering the master plan for the flight to Varennes, was the royal family's escape doomed from the beginning? According to Tackett, what factors contributed to the plan's failure?
3. What factors contributed to the increasing radicalization in Paris between the summer of 1789 and the summer of 1791? What was the atmosphere in Paris on the eve of the king's flight? What was the Parisian reaction to the news that the royal family was gone?
4. Discuss the spread of the news that the King had fled Paris. Compare and contrast the way people in Paris and the provinces responded to news of the king's flight.
5. Though the Jacobins are typically blamed for originating and perpetuating the Terror, are there any indications during the Legislative Assembly that such extreme measures might be inevitable? Is there a sense of terror before "The Terror?" How does Tackett connect the king's flight to the onset of the Terror?
6. Assess Tackett's argument that the liberal regime of 1789 was not doomed to failure. (Explain his argument and discuss whether or not you think it's convincing, with evidence to support your answer.) Why did the king's flight endanger the success of the Revolution? Could Louis have remained king if he had acted differently?
   

Posting comments on the blog

I know a few of you have been having problems posting comments on the blog, especially with the word verification. I have removed the word verification requirement from the blog, so this should no longer be an issue.

Participation for this week

Since we will be discussing Tackett in class on Wednesday, you do not have to make any blog comments this week. I'm hoping to hear from most of you during the discussion on Wednesday. Please make sure to have the book read and at least some rudimentary notes jotted down. Because, really, don't you hate when you're called on and have to admit out loud that you didn't complete the reading?

However, since we only have one day to talk about Tackett, after Wednesday's class I will submit a catch-all post about the book, where you can make any comments that you didn't get a chance to express in class. (This is a particularly good idea for those of you who have not been keeping up with regular blog comments.) Also, you can pose any questions that you didn't get a chance to ask. I will answer these in the comments section, so everyone might want to take a look at that post before starting the paper.

Tackett paper due date

This is just to remind everyone that the Tackett paper is due on Monday, March 30.

Cast of characters for Monday's lecture

On Monday, I will be lecturing about the early years of the Jacobin Club, as well as the formation of the Feuillant Club -- a group of moderates who split from the Jacobins in the summer of 1791. There will be several new names introduced in that lecture. I'm including the major figures here so that you can refer to the relevant portions of the Popkin book and get a thumbnail sketch of who these people were.

Mirabeau
Barnave
Duport
A. de Lameth
Robespierre