This paper asks you to be the historian. Read the assigned segments of Peter A. Morton’s The Trial of Tempel Anneke: Records of a Witchcraft Trial in Brunswick, Germany, 1663. This is a transcript of a witchcraft trial and you must take these transcripts (primary documents) and use them to answer ONE of the following three questions in a thoughtful essay. Be sure to use examples from the book and have an argument.
1. What does this trial show about attitudes towards witchcraft in Early Modern Europe?
2. What does this trial reveal about everyday life in 1663?
3. You tell the story – using footnotes to show your evidence – of what happened. From whose viewpoint would you tell it? What would you highlight? You must include a paragraph explaining how your choices highlight the historical points you are trying to make.
Include direct quotes and/or specific examples from Morton and cite them. This is your evidence and an essay is only as good as the support you have for your points.
Each body paragraph should have its own distinct topic, which should be stated in the first sentence. Your topic sentence should be centered on an idea rather than being descriptive.
The best paper should do more than just show us x, y, and z about witchcraft or everyday life. You should reach for what those points together tell us about society at that time. In the best papers the points should build off each other and cumulate in an overarching point. [For the third option you can accomplish this in the explanatory paragraph and your narrative should have a historical point as its goal]
Make sure you provide a clear thesis statement in your introduction. A thesis needs to stake out your position and should be followed by a sentence briefly summarizing how you intend to prove it. This thesis needs to be explicit about which question you are answering!
· If you answer question 1 about social attitudes, you should present the points-of-view for at least two groups (e.g. ecclesiastical authority, secular authority, social elites, commoners, Protestants, Catholics, men, women).
You should aim for at least three specific examples to use as evidence for your argument. You will devote a separate paragraph (at least) to each point.
· All general statements need to be followed by specific examples or details to elaborate the point.
· You should offer a brief description of your example to establish the context for your analysis. Provide who, what, when, where, and how/why.
· If you paraphrase information from one of the primary sources, cite it just as you would a direct quotation.
· Choose your direct quotes judiciously. You may refer to the Introduction to help with context, but if you quote directly from the book, it should only be from one of the primary sources. This quote should explicitly demonstrate your point, so choose your evidence well.
· You should explain what this evidence demonstrates.
· You should explicitly tell me how the evidence supports your argument and why it is significant.
· You should provide a transition to your next example by showing its connection to the current example.
You must cite your sources, whether it is a paraphrase or a direct quote. Direct quotes must be cited immediately after the quoted material; paraphrased information can be combined into a single citation at the end of a paragraph. If you are not certain whether or not to cite, err on the side of caution and cite it anyway.
· Citations can be parenthetical within the essay: (Folio 22, 75) or (O’Neill, Lecture, 10/31/17)
· Citations can be footnotes: Folio 22, 75 or O’Neill, Lecture, 10/31/17
· Since there is more than one edition of the book, please cite both the document title (Folio 22) and the page your citation is found on (75).
· If using the Kindle edition, cite just the document title or the section heading for the introduction.
· You do not need a works cited page unless you are using a different edition than the assigned book.Please provide the author’s full name, book title, place of publication, publisher, and publication year.
Your conclusion will recapitulate the main points of the essay and your thesis. Do not introduce a new line of inquiry or an open-ended question. It should seek to answer the “so what?” question. In other words: explain how Tempel Anneke’s case fits into the bigger picture of seventeenth century Europe and is not just an interesting outlier or local phenomena.
· Do not overstate your argument, what your evidence shows, or its historical applicability (e.g. “Since the dawn of man”).
· Avoid using hypothetical examples. Argue only what you can prove with concrete examples.
· Eliminate categorical statements or hyperbole (words like “always” or “never”). They are often easily refuted by counter-examples and their lack of nuance strikes the wrong tone with the reader.
· Use formal language instead of slang or colloquialisms.