By using Haigh, Christopher. English Reformations: Religion, Politics, and Society under the Tudors. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. (ISBN: 978-0198221623) and additional 3 book reviews in order to help you write an in-depth, critical essay. You will engage fully with the texts through direct and indirect quotations (with parenthetical citations). Your job, as outlined below, is to not only discuss what Haigh wrote, but also how he wrote and if he adequately proved his thesis. By systematically reading the book together over the course of three weeks, you will be able to see not only the content side of the equation, but the structural side as well in the monograph.
NUTS AND BOLTS Structure is critical to an effective essay. You must have an introduction that sets the stage for the reader and has the thesis statement prominently featured (usually toward the end of the introduction). A thesis can be more than one sentence. A good introduction and thesis, in an historical essay, â€œgives awayâ€ the point to the reader at the outset. The body paragraphs (which proceed in the order they are mentioned in the thesis) serve to â€œshow your workâ€ for the thesis statement. Each paragraph has one major idea â€“ if you find that your paragraph is a page or two long, then there are probably too many ideas in it. A good paragraph can be moved around an essay and acts as its own miniature essay, with the framing topic sentence acting as the â€œthesisâ€ for the paragraph. Finally, a conclusion reminds the reader where they have been, and what was truly important. The best essays will be ones that liberally use direct and indirect citations to Haigh and the book reviews. For the sake of simplicity, we are going to do parenthetical citations: authorâ€™s last name + page number, i.e. (Haigh 270). You MUST use a parenthetical citation when you are directly quoting, AND when you are paraphrasing an authorâ€™s idea in your own words.
YOUR CRITIQUE ESSAY WILL ADDRESS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. What is Haighâ€™s thesis? a. Is it clear for the reader? Why or why not? 2. How does Haigh support that thesis? a. What is his evidence? Do you think his evidence is strong? Why or why not? b. Does he adequately prove his thesis with evidence? Why or why not? 3. How is the book structured? a. Is it an effective structure, in your opinion? Why or why not? 4. What do other historians say about the book? a. What do THREE (3) additional historians say about the book? i. Who are these historians? ii. Do you agree or disagree with their assessment? Why or why not? 5. What is your overall evaluation of the book? a. What are the strengths and weaknesses?
The paper should be a least 6 pages double spaced, size 12 times new roman, 1 in margins, regular spacing in between paragraphs. Everything must be cited