Joan of Arc: Letter to the King of England, 1429 Analysis

Primary Source Analysis Papers--This semester, you will write a response paper on a primary source. This paper will should be about 2-3 page in length, in which you will analyze a primary source, as well as to argue clearly and convincingly about its role in the historical milieu. Your analysis should use the techniques set out by the class handout, How to Approach Primary Source Extracts. For more detailed information on these assignments, please see the PDF handout Primary Source Essays in the Course Documents section of eCourseware.
You may choose from any of the primary source documents found on the course schedule. Please email me if you have any questions.
Your analysis should use the techniques set out by the class handout, How to Approach Primary Source Extracts. You should make an argument using one or more of the more sophisticated elements of primary source analysis – Bias, Absence, Reliability, Today, and Relate. You should be making an historical argument though, and state it clearly in a thesis statement. Please remember to analyze the texts using close-reading techniques, noting details, connections, and patterns. Essays should be organized with a clear thesis statement and well-supported with evidence from the texts.
I am looking for you to take your analysis beyond what we have discussed on the discussion boards for this class. This means more in-depth critiques and evaluation of the sources, and its role in the larger debate about feudalism. When use secondary scholarly works to help formulate your ideas (such as the articles above), you must cite them within your essay as well as on a Works Cited page. No doing so constitutes academic dishonesty.
Citations should follow Chicago Manual of Style footnote or in-text parenthetical methods. If you do not know these methods, this reference work is available online (under the course links portion of the eCourseware homepage).

 HOW TO APPROACH PRIMARY SOURCE EXTRACTS Historians study the sources that the past has left behind. No statement about the past can carry conviction unless it can be supported by reference to the historical sources, the evidence upon which historians base their ideas and interpretations. Historians inevitably spend a lot of time reading each other's writings, but the real historical work is done – and the real enjoyment is to be had – in studying the sources, the actual ‘stuff’ of history. One of the most important challenges facing the historian is to get into the mindset of people in the past who saw and understood the world in very different ways from us. All too often it is easy for us to look rather patronizingly at the beliefs and practices of earlier ages and to judge them by our own standards, instead of trying to understand them according to the standards and beliefs of the time. The medieval period has suffered particularly badly from this heavily present-centred view of the past. We will be discussing primary sources in class, and you will be writing about them in your essays, and on the final exam. To get the most out of the primary source extracts it is essential that you ask questions of them. Even if you believe you cannot arrive at the answers, imagining possible answers will aid your comprehension. It sometimes helps to have a structured way of approaching texts. One possibility is set out below. You should always offer evidence for your answers. Content: What is the extract about? Context: Who, what, where, when? Interpretation: Why? How accurate is it? Date: Can you tell when the extract was written? Is it contemporary with its content? Audience: What is the intended audience? Author: Who is s/he, what is his/her place in society? Purpose: Why did the author write this? Does s/he have an argument? If so, how does s/he make his/her case? Bias: Is this a particular point of view? Are/were other approaches possible? How accurate is the extract (cf. no. l above)? Absence: Does the extract fail to mention anything? Is this important? Does the author respond to any arguments and concerns that are not clearly stated? Does s/he seem to be refuting a position that is not stated? Reliability: Is the text reliable? Today: How do the ideas and values in the sources differ from those of our own age? What preconceptions and presumptions do we bring to the extract? How might differences between our values and those of the author influence the way we understand the text? Might this lead us to misinterpret it? Might it lead us to understand it in a way that contemporaries would not have? •Relate: Compare with other sources