Pleasures and Excess In the Roman Empire Written by Paul Veyne

Article Review of “Pleasures and Excess In the Roman Empire Written by Paul Veyne”

ARTICLE REVIEW GUIDE

The purpose for parallel reading (reading other than the textbook) is to broaden the student’s awareness of and acquaintance with the literature of a given area of
history. Article reviews are useful means of obliging students to do their parallel reading in a manner that requires critical and constructive evaluation of the
article chosen. Requiring reviews of works read is the best means of sharpening the student’s critical faculties and making the student aware of the necessity of
asking questions of the material as she/he reads.

An Article Review is a critical analysis of an article preceded by a full bibliographical citation of the work being reviewed. It does not just summarize the contents
of the article but is an evaluation of the technique, organization, and thesis of the author, his/her interpretations and judgments and style of writing. Ultimately,
it requires an appraisal of the relative success or failure of the article as a serious and truthful work of history. Finally, the review should incorporate the
highest standards of the English language.

A valid article review should include the following:

I. A complete bibliographical entry at the top of the first page. You should include author, full title, journal of publication, date and pages.

EXAMPLE

Waters, W. Davis, “’Deception Is the Art of War”: Gabriel J. Rains, Torpedo Specialist of the Confederacy”, The North Carolina Historical Review January, 1989, 29-
60.

II. Critical Analysis:

This analysis should constitute the major part of the review and answer the following questions:

A. What was the author trying to do? What was the author’s thesis?

B. How did the author organize the article? Chronologically? Topically?

C. What did the author use for sources? Primary sources?* Secondary sources? What were those sources? Give an evaluation of them.

D. Was there a bibliography? Were there footnotes? Were they helpful?

E. Who was the author? Qualifications? Publications? (research this)

F. Is there evidence of prejudice or bias on the author’s part? Is the article propaganda?

G. Do the facts presented agree with each other and with those in the major text for this course?

H. Are there glaring contradictions by the author in the article?

I. Are there errors?

J. How well did the author succeed in doing what she/he set out to do?
III. Utility or Importance of the article:

A. In what way does this article relate to, add to, contradict or support the subject matter of the history course for which you are reading it?

B. Does the article refute public errors and misconceptions?

C. Does the article shed light upon some historical problem?

D. Does the article contribute to the general education of the reader?

IV. Finally, the reader should make a few pointed comments about the style and readability of the article. Ask the simple question, “Does the writing style help
or hinder the reader’s understanding and absorbing of the article’s contents?”
Three to four pages, typed, 10-12 font, double-spaced constitute the usual article review.

Include a cover sheet with your name, course, and date.

IN ANSWERING THE YES-NO QUESTIONS ABOVE, YOU SHOULD, OF COURSE, EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWERS AND SUPPORT THOSE ANSWERS WITH APPROPRIATE MATERIAL FROM THE ARTICLE ITSELF. DO
NOT SIMPLY STATE THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. SEE EXAMPLE ON RESERVE IN THE LIBRARY.

IF YOU QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE, PLACE THAT MATERIAL IN QUOTATION MARKS AND THE PAGE NUMBER IN PARENTHESES AT THE END OF THE QUOTATION. FAILURE TO DO SO CONSTITUTES
PLAGIARISM.

IF YOUR SUPPORTING MATERIAL IS NOT A DIRECT QUOTE, BUT A PARAPHRASING, NO QUOTATION MARKS ARE NECESSARY, BUT STILL CITE THE PAGE NUMBER(S) USED TO BUILD THE
PARAPHRASE. THOSE NUMBERS, TOO, SHOULD GO AT THE END OF THE PARAPHRASED MATERIAL. FAILURE TO DO SO CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM.

DOCUMENT THE SOURCE USED IN RESEARCHING THE AUTHOR’S BACKGROUND. FAILURE TO DO SO CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM.

USING SOMEONE ELSES PAPER FOR YOUR OWN CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM.

PENALTY FOR PLAGIARISM MAY INCLUDE FAILING THE COURSE.

I do read rough drafts if you make an appointment with me or if in my internet section you send a copy to my drop box at least 4 days before the final due date. For
my internet section I need a 2-day turn around period.

You may only review articles found posted in Readings in Black Board for this course. Choose any that have been assigned as indicated on your syllabus. For our
purposes, however, the article on Alexander the Great will not work.

An example of a well-written article review is on reserve in the LRC. The LRC is located on Second Street. Reserve readings are located behind the circulation desk.
A student ID is required to obtain reserve readings.

See me early if you have questions. Due date for the review is in your syllabus.

* A primary source is one from the time being studied. Examples include letters, newspaper accounts, journal entries, photographs and paintings, court documents, tax
records, and others. See me if you are unsure.

SOME IMPORTANT RULES OF WRITING

Use active, rather than passive, voice.

Lead into quotations.

Avoid the use of first person; I, Me, etc.
And from the August, 26th 1999 issue of The Outrider :

“Verbs has to agree with their subjects.

A writer mustn’t shift your point of view.

About sentence fragments.

Don’t abrev.

Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.

It is important to never ever under any circumstances split an infinitive.

Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.

Last but not least, avoid clichés like the plague.” (P. 15)
FOR YOUR ASSIGNMENTS TO BE DONE AT A CHEAPER PRICE PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US NOW