Reference no: EM131936968

Topic is 'caesar the general and Leader'

Guidelines for Papers

Your paper shows not only the thoughtful reading and research that you've put into your topic, but also the extensive care that you've taken in writing, rewriting, correcting, and polishing your work. What you say depends on how you say it. Crummy spelling and careless punctuation will destroy any hard work that you've invested in your subject. Remember that your revisions are even more important than your first draft. You don't really know what you're saying until you've put it on paper and read it critically. The very wealthy and prolific writer Stephen King says in his (very lame) book on writing that you should never revise what you put on paper, because your first thoughts are most important and won't be improved by revision. This is stupid, and there are few good writers who would agree with this. Please don't send me an unrevised first draft, written at the last minute, that pretends to be a paper. Print it out; pick up a pen; and go through it as if it were written by someone you dislike. Try to prove that every sentence is badly written and can be improved. Don't ask yourself "is this sentence OK?" Ask yourself "can I cut this part out? How can I make this better?" Have a trusted friend read it and tear it apart.

1. Format: I don't care what standard that you follow, as long as you are consistent. I care more about what you say than the very minutest specifics of appearance. (But see 5.e below).
- Send it to me as an email attachment in "Mail".
- Use the .rtf or .pdf file extensions.
- Don't use the .doc or .docx extensions; files with the .doc extension sometimes don't work (MS Word can be a pain).
- Here's how: In MS Word: click on "File"
- click on "Save As"
- in "Save As Type" drop the menu down to "Rich Text Format"
- save the paper with the title: [your last name].Classics270.rtf
- which will give the title: [Brutus].Classics270.rtf (assuming that your last name is "Brutus").

2. Requirements: 12 pages minimum, and longer (if it's good) is fine.
- What "7 pages" means: 7 pages of your actual writing. Notes and bibliography do not count. Your illustration does not count. 5 ½ sheets of paper with extra- wide margins do not meet the minimum requirement. It should be double-spaced, 1 ½ inch margins all around, with illustrations, notes, and bibliography attached at the end (not included in the body of the text).

3. Rules: please see the Course Rules note in the Course Rules folder.
- This includes the policy on deadlines (they matter) and Plagiarism (you cheat, you fail).
- What you can't do: cutting and pasting passages from websites is not the same thing as writing a paper. Any material that is not your original idea, and is not your own original writing, must be properly cited in a note. Your Notes and Bibliography need not be extensive, but they need to be there to explain the scholarly basis of your work.
- What you REALLY can't do: you may not use Wikipedia at any point, in any way, when researching and writing this paper. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If any portion of your paper is a direct quote, a copied passage or illustration, or a paraphrase, from Wikipedia, your paper will receive an F grade.

4. Topic: you must clear this with me.
- If I don't approve of your topic ahead of time, you'll lose a whole grade on the paper.
- I give you a good deal of leeway in choosing your topic, as long as it is relevant to our course. This might include: evidence for a particular cult; problems with a particular temple; evidence for a procedure; an office or candidate; product or artefact. You might show the developments over time of a procedure; you might compare two very specific things. Your job, then, is to choose a subject narrow enough to cover in the short compass of this assignment. The broad range of possible topics helps you to choose a subject that you like. You can't do the history of Gaul in 7 pages, but, for example, you could compare the sources for a particular incident; or focus on some problem in Caesar's career; or discuss a particular period--things like that--in this short compass of 7 pages. You can't cover all of Caesar's building program in 7 pages, but you might choose an aspect, or the references about one project.
- You need to go beyond the general description and treatment given in our texts, and your work must say something worthwhile. "The Forum Iulium was truly a great building project" doesn't really fit this requirement. If you choose something covered extensively in our texts, your paper will be compared with that work, and it will be difficult for you to go beyond their treatment.

5. Content: You must have a clear Thesis statement (what you're trying to do) , and a clearly-stated Procedure (how you're going to proceed) in your Introduction. Here are some examples that I have used in my courses:

a. Introduction: Get right to the point. Remember your audience (it's me); don't explain things well-known to your audience (me).
- Is your paper about the Etruscan column? Then it should begin: "The Etruscan column..." Leave out a preamble or a pointless background ("Roman civilization produced many great works of art."). Instead, in the very first sentence of the paper, get right to the point that you are going to develop ("The Fenway Park mosaic in the House of the Pitcher at Pompeii shows similarities to the Wrigley Field mosaic in the House of the Base Stealer at Herculaneum." Develop this for at least a couple of sentences, before you offer your Procedure.
- If you were taught in high school to begin with a broad generalization and then gradually work your way to a sharper point, it's time to put away the things of your youth. Don't say that Rome was great or that Pompeii was a flourishing city before the volcano erupted; don't say that the ancient world offers us many wonderful examples of exciting discoveries that make us yearn for their glorious times. Your tone should assume a discussion among people who know the material of this course. Sound like an authority.
b. Organize your paper carefully. Your Introduction should include your Thesis, followed by your Procedure.
- The best way to do your Thesis: leave out a preamble or a pointless background ("Roman civilization produced many great works of art.") Instead, in the very first sentence of the paper, get right to the point that you are going to develop ("The Fenway Park mosaic in the House of the Pitcher at Pompeii shows similarities to the Wrigley Field mosaic in the House of the Base Stealer at Herculaneum." Develop this for at least a couple of sentences, before you offer your Procedure.
- The best way to do your Procedure: "First, I intend to discuss the specific color patterns of the panels. Second, I will show how each mosaic has a unique border pattern. Finally, I will demonstrate how the figures in each work share a unique pose." And then each part of your paper will follow each specific item in this list. Do you see how this gives to both you the writer, and to me the reader, a very clear plan to follow? If you leave this out, your paper probably won't be well-organized.

c. Watch your Topic Sentences. Each paragraph should begin with a sentence that offers a point to be developed.
- Test this: can you answer "Oh yeah? Develop that!" to each topic sentence that you've written? If so, it's good. If your topic sentence is merely an "And then..." sentence, you won't be able to develop a good paragraph. Flip through one of the books in the course, and read just the topic sentences for a few pages. This will give you an idea of how this works.
- Good topic sentence: "The Sullan colony completely changed the religious structure of Pompeii." You can develop this.
- Bad topic sentence: "Next we come to the Temple of Venus." Yawn. Hard to challenge or develop that.

d. Conclusion: it's the hardest thing to write.
- It should not just restate your opening ("And so we see that [insert Introduction here]". Introductions and Conclusions aren't interchangeable: if you can cut your Conclusion off of your paper and put it at the beginning, and still have it make sense, then it's not a Conclusion. If you can tear your Conclusion off the paper entirely, and, when you read it aloud, it makes sense entirely on its own, it's not a good conclusion. The Introduction offers a new topic for discussion; the Conclusion should only make sense as a result of the previous pages of your paper: a new perspective, a twist. Your reader should be able to say, after reading the Conclusion: "Oh, NOW I see it."