how do i actually write a history essay (1 Viewer)

[dillydally]

seriously this sounds stupid but i physically can not stop reiterating a narrative every time i do a practise exam and it’s crucifying my marks

 

[ermmmmwhat]

that's a common mistake, dw. the best way to write a history essay is to actually have arguments as topic sentences and then work down, adding bits of narrative as EVIDENCE for your claim not as substance.

for example, if your question was "evaluate the relationship between agrippina and nero" (i did ancient not modern lol), you wouldn't just describe the narrative story of their life together, you would have 3 main points:
- agrippina and nero's initial relationship was mutually beneficial as nero was used as a political pawn in order to further both of their political position in the roman state.
- agrippina and nero's later relationship was turbulent as they pitted against each other to keep hold of newfound power.
- agrippina and nero's relationship in final years were adversarial and tainted, which was propelled especially by nero's new romantic and political relationships.

so each topic sentence is an argument, and then u use pieces of evidence to always work back to the question. i hope this helped!

 

[dillydally]

that's a common mistake, dw. the best way to write a history essay is to actually have arguments as topic sentences and then work down, adding bits of narrative as EVIDENCE for your claim not as substance.

for example, if your question was "evaluate the relationship between agrippina and nero" (i did ancient not modern lol), you wouldn't just describe the narrative story of their life together, you would have 3 main points:
- agrippina and nero's initial relationship was mutually beneficial as nero was used as a political pawn in order to further both of their political position in the roman state.
- agrippina and nero's later relationship was turbulent as they pitted against each other to keep hold of newfound power.
- agrippina and nero's relationship in final years were adversarial and tainted, which was propelled especially by nero's new romantic and political relationships.

so each topic sentence is an argument, and then u use pieces of evidence to always work back to the question. i hope this helped!

omge thank you so much! that helped a lot actually. how would you approach 'to what extent..." questions??? eg like "to what extent was x the main cause of y" would i exclusively speak about x?

 

[ermmmmwhat]

yupp those are common questions too, but quite approachable!
using ur example of "to what extent was x the main cause of y" -> you would need to determine firstly whether x caused y to a low extent, high extent, or moderate extent.

once you evaluate that, your essay essentially is made of points to support why you think it is that extent. say you think that x caused y to a high extent, your body paras would be
- since ..., x indeed caused y to a high extent
-further, considering how ..., showcasing how x did in fact cause y to a high extent
- additionally, ..., proving that x caused y to a high extent.

same structure for if you argue low extent. for moderate extent, you need to argue how x cause y to a moderate extent throughout your whole essay. you cant just have 2 paras on why x caused y to a high extent and then 1 para on why x caused y to a low extent, that would invalidate your earlier arguments. so every body para has to ultimately say that x caused y only to a moderate extent.

hope this made sense!

 

[Ybot08]

I also did Agrippinna
Ancient is cool

Now, how do we do a historiography essay?

 

[ermmmmwhat]

I also did Agrippinna
Ancient is cool

Now, how do we do a historiography essay?

i agree about ancient!

historiographical essays are often not about the history or the narrative at all, it instead has everything to do with the historians (their viewpoints and how their contexts shaped these viewpoints). its really all about the debate of historians.

im assuming you are asking about your major work -> to write it, you need to center your paragraphs around points of debates in your major research topic, then have around 4-5 historians per para who all have unique points on this debate. you essentially pit these historians against each other and make them go back and forth. this method is highly effective since it shows a great amount of nuance and debate, which historiography is centered around.

hope this helped!

 

[dillydally]

yupp those are common questions too, but quite approachable!
using ur example of "to what extent was x the main cause of y" -> you would need to determine firstly whether x caused y to a low extent, high extent, or moderate extent.

once you evaluate that, your essay essentially is made of points to support why you think it is that extent. say you think that x caused y to a high extent, your body paras would be
- since ..., x indeed caused y to a high extent
-further, considering how ..., showcasing how x did in fact cause y to a high extent
- additionally, ..., proving that x caused y to a high extent.

same structure for if you argue low extent. for moderate extent, you need to argue how x cause y to a moderate extent throughout your whole essay. you cant just have 2 paras on why x caused y to a high extent and then 1 para on why x caused y to a low extent, that would invalidate your earlier arguments. so every body para has to ultimately say that x caused y only to a moderate extent.

hope this made sense!

my lifesaver ily