HIS 734-H001
Nations and Nationalism
University of Southern Mississippi, Fall 2011
W 3:50-6:25 pm, LAB 455
Professor Jeff Bowersox
jeff.bowersox@usm.edu
Office: LAB 452 (601-266-4519)
Office Hours: M-F 11:00-12:00 or by appointment
Course description:
What are "nations" and "nationalism," where did they come from, where are they going, and
what roles have these commonly used and mis-used concepts played in the development of
modern European history? In this class we will address how historians have tried to answer
these questions, ranging from sociologically informed studies trying to map the historical
existence and specificity of nations through political and cultural studies engaging with the idea
and mobilizing potential of the nation. The complications, contestations, and co-optations of
the national idea will be a particular focus for us this semester.
Course objectives
Upon successful completion of this course, students will be able to
 discuss (verbally and in written form) with sophistication the rise and development of
nations and nationalism in modern European history.
 critically analyze secondary sources.
 propose, organize, and construct a research essay that combines historiographical
analysis with a sophisticated study of primary sources.
Course Materials:
Course materials are NOT available from the Barnes & Noble on campus, so feel free to search
out used copies at much more reasonable prices from such sites as www.addallbooks.com,
www.half.com, www.choosebooks.com, www.alibris.com, www.abebooks.com, and
www.amazon.com. Any edition of the books is fine for our purposes.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism.
New York: Verso, 2006 (orig. 1983).
Brubaker, Rogers. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1992.
1
Colley, Linda. Britons: Forging the Nation 1707-1837. 3rd revised edition. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press, 2009 (orig. 1992).
Confino, Alon. The Nation as a Local Metaphor: Württemberg, Imperial Germany, and National
Memory, 1871-1918. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997.
De Grazia, Victoria. How Fascism Ruled Women: Italy, 1922-1945. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1992.
Eley, Geoff and Ronald Grigor Suny, eds. Becoming National: A Reader. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1996. Indicated below by BN.
Fehrenbach, Heide. Race after Hitler: Black Occupation Children in Postwar Germany and America.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.
Greenfield, Liah. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1992.
Hall, Catherine, Terry McClelland, and Jane Rendell. Defining the Victorian Nation: Class, Race,
Gender and the Reform Act of 1867. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
King, Peter. Budweisers into Czechs and Germans: A Local History of Bohemian Politics, 1848-1948.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.
Martin, Terry. The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 19231939. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2001.
Mosse, George. The Nationalization of the Masses: Political Symbolism and Mass Movements in
Germany from the Napoleonic Wars through the Third Reich. New York: Howard Fertig,
2001 (orig. 1975).
Sahlins, Peter. Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1989.
Slezkine, Yuri. The Jewish Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006.
And assorted readings that will be provided by the professor
Assessment:
In-class participation
Online participation (.5% x 14, 150 words each)
Formal book reviews (4% x 7, 750 words each)
Research essay (4500-5000 woreds, due 30 Nov.)
Final exam (all you can write in 4 hours, 7-14 Dec.)
Total
15%
7%
28%
35%
15%
100%
Assignments:
In-class participation (15%)
This is a seminar class organized entirely around discussions of the readings at hand. I expect
you to come to class prepared to discuss. This means you should have read the texts, reflected
on their content and implications, and composed a thoughtful response. I know that some are
more talkative than others, but an essential part of graduate school is learning to articulate
positions orally.
It should go without saying that attendance is mandatory because you cannot participate if you
are not present. If something comes up, you must let me know immediately.
Online participation (.5% x 14, 150 words each)
2
In preparation for each class, students must submit a brief (no more than 150 words) and
informal summary of major issues or questions raised by the week's readings. You are
encouraged to respond to one another as you do so and certainly to make sure you have read all
the responses as you prepare for class. Your initial response is due on the Discussion section of
turnitin.com at least 24 hours before class so that we all have time to read and reflect. Please
feel freee to continue the conversation up until class-time (and expect credit for doing so!).
Formal book reviews (4% x7, 750 words each)
Students will compose 7 formal book reviews over the course of the semester. Each review will
focus on a monograph (although you should feel free to use other readings to inform your
comments). These will follow guidelines provided at the end of this syllabus and will be due on
turnitin.com by the start of the relevant class meeting. Everyone will write on Mosse so we
have a uniform starting point, but you may choose which other six you would like to review.
You are responsible for making sure you complete the required amount.
Research essay (35%, 4500-5000 words, 30 Nov.) (proposal 12 Oct.)
Students will write a research essay that investigates a major question pertaining to the course
theme. This essay will be based on primary source analysis and will include a historiographical
discussion that justifies and situates the research. Students can choose a topic directly related to
their thesis research or may choose another topic entirely but may not submit the same paper in
multiple classes. Submit your essay on turnitin.com by the start of class on 30 Nov.
To make sure that you are on the right track, you are required to submit a Proposal by 12 Oct.
This will consist of a survey of your approach, potential theses, and a list of the works you
intend to examine. This is not meant to be the beginning of your project but rather the result of
considerable engagement with your sources and an opportunity for me to help direct your next
steps.
If you fail to submit a satisfactory proposal on time, I will not grade your essay.
Final exam (15%, 4-hour exam, 7-14 Dec)
Your final exam will be a mock comps question. I will make available a sealed question after
our final class (Wed., 7 Dec), and you are free to choose when you complete the exam, as long as
you do so within one week. You will have 4 hours from the time you open it, and you are
allowed no outside materials. Your answer must be uploaded to turnitin.com by 5pm on Wed.,
14 Dec., so don’t start any later than 1pm on that day.
Please note that you will be examined not merely on your familiarity with narrative but more so
on your engagement with the historiographical questions we raise in class.
Notes:
Turnitin.com
Students agree that by taking this course all required papers may be subject to submission for
textual similarity review to Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers
will be included as source documents in the Turnitin.com reference database solely for the
purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. The terms that apply to the university’s use of
the Turnitin.com service are described on the Turnitin.com website.

Go to www.turnitin.com, register as a student, and join the class.
o Class ID: 4190534
Class password: osaycanusee
3


You may upload the file as an attachment or copy and paste it into the website.
You may submit essays early if you wish.
Lateness
I will not accept tardiness in any form. Do not come late to class, and do not submit
assignments late. Unless otherwise noted, all written assignments are due by the start of class.
No extensions will be given except for certified medical or humanitarian reasons. Failure to
schedule your time appropriately over the course of the semester is not a valid reason.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is scholarly theft and thus an offence that I take very seriously, most especially at the
graduate level. I am happy to assist you but am also equally vigilant about prosecuting
offences. Failure to abide by the standards noted below constitutes a violation of the code of
student conduct and may be grounds for automatic failure, probation, suspension, expulsion, or
all of the above.
Briefly, plagiarism is defined as the use – intentional or unintentional – of ideas, information, or
language from another source without proper attribution. When quoting directly from another
source, you must enclose the material in quotation marks and cite the source. Even if you
paraphrase material, you must still cite. When in doubt, cite. Feel free to contact me if you have
questions about whether or not to cite. For more, see the overview and examples at
www.historians.org/governance/pd/Curriculum/plagiarism_intro.htm.
Questions and concerns
For any written assignment, you have the right to request explanation or even review of your
mark. However, I ask that you wait at least 24 hours to consider comments before contacting
me. If you do wish to challenge your mark, please provide an explanation in writing as to why
you feel your mark is unfair. Address my comments specifically and submit this at least 24
hours before meeting so that I may consider your points.
4
Course outline
24 Aug.
Introduction to course themes and expectations
31 Aug.
Origins and nature of the nation
BN: 1-177
Franke Wilmer, “Identity, Culture, and Historicity: The Social Construction of Ethnicity in the
Balkans,” World Affairs (summer 1997): 3-16. Available through JStor.
7 Sep.
Political mobilization and the nation
Mosse, Nationalization of the Masses (1975)
First book review
14 Sep.
Inventing the nation
Anderson, Imagined Communities (1983)
BN: Skurski, Heiberg
21 Sep.
Modernization nation
Greenfield, Nationalism (1992)
BN: Malki
28 Sep.
The view from the periphery
Sahlins, Boundaries (1989)
BN: Stoler
5 Oct.
The nation and its others
Colley, Britons (1992)
12 Oct.
Citizenship and the nation
Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (1992)
Proposal
19 Oct.
Defining the nation
Hall et al., Defining the Victorian Nation (2000)
Readings from Italy's "Southern Question"
26 Oct.
Homelands and nation
Confino, Nation as a Local Metaphor (1997)
BN: Morley and Robbins
2 Nov.
Identity and nation
King, Budweisers into Czechs and Germans (2005)
9 Nov.
Multinational empire
Martin, Affirmative Action Empire (2001)
BN: Slezkine
16 Nov.
Transnational nation
Slezkine, The Jewish Century (2006)
BN: Tölölyan
30 Nov.
Gender and the uses of the nation
DeGrazia, How Fascism Ruled Women (1992)
Research essay
BN: McClintock
7 Dec.
Race and the nation
Fehrenbach, Race after Hitler (2007)
BN: Hall, Gilroy, Peck
Please note: The professor reserves the right to amend the syllabus at any time.
5
Book review guidelines
Writing a book review is a particular skill. It requires the ability to summarize fairly and
objectively, to interrogate the use of sources you likely have not seen, to ask critical questions,
and to locate a work in larger contexts. Mastering these requires practice, but here are some
instructions and tips that can help you on your way to becoming excellent reviewers.
Checklist
_____ I have included the following information and formatted it according to the Chicago
Manual of Style.
Jerry Atric. I Remember When…Or Do I? An Oral History of Aging in Late Twentieth
Century America. New York: Routledge, 2011. x + 754 pp. Illustrations,
appendices, notes. $34.90 (paper), ISBN 5-555-55555-5.
_____ I have not included a title page but rather put my name, date, class, and professor’s
name (all single-spaced) in the top left corner of the first page.
_____ I have numbered my pages.
_____ I have used uniform 1” margins all around, 12 pt. font Times New Roman or Arial (or an
equivalent).
_____ I have double-spaced my review to make it easier to read and comment on.
_____ I have kept my review within the assigned word limit (often 750 words).
_____ I have summarized the general subject of the book.
_____ I have summarized the author’s central argument in terms s/he would recognize.
_____ I have addressed the sorts of resources used to support the thesis (is there significant
archival research, what types of analysis is utilized, does s/he pay due attention to the
secondary literature, is there a particular theoretical basis…?)
_____ I have addressed the related historiography. (Are there other books on this same
subject? Authors often discuss, usually in their introduction if nowhere else, previously
published work on their subject and how they feel about those studies.)
_____ I have defended my support for or criticism of the author’s argument with examples or
citations from the text.
_____ I have offered evidence for every point I make about the book under review. Where
useful, I have cited with parenthetical page citations or with references to entire sections
as follows:
Atric argues convincingly that “to understand the experience of aging, one must
appreciate the social context and contemporary mores surrounding this
unavoidable reality.” (7)
Atric’s work is at its weakest when he discusses conceptions of aging among
toddlers. (chapters 7-12) OR Atric’s work is at its weakest in chapters 7-12, in
which he discusses conceptions of aging among toddlers.
_____ I have made clear the audience (if any) for this book. (Is this a book best read by
specialists in a particular field, by anyone interested in a subject, by undergraduates, by
school-children, by no one …?)
6
_____ I have written my review in an appropriately professional tone.
Common errors to avoid

Don’t Do not use contractions. Spell out the words completely.

Use an individual or organization’s full name the first time you use it in your paper. After
that you can use just last names, refer to an individual by title, etc. If you are going to use
an abbreviation for an organization, such as the S.C.L.C., make sure 1) it has periods after
each letter and 2) that you use the full name the first time you refer to the organization,
including the abbreviation in parentheses: “ … which led to the organization of the Southern
Christian Leadership Conference (S.C.L.C.).”

Do not use personal pronouns such as: “In this paper, I will argue….” Scholarly historical
writing takes the personal perspective out of writing. The only exception to this might be in
the preface or introduction of a book, or in a conversational endnote. For the sake of your
papers/assignments, never use personal pronouns. Instead write something like, “This
paper will examine ….”

Avoid repeating words; use synonyms.

Avoid colloquialisms, clichés, and a chatty writing style. Research papers, book reviews, or
other historical writing require a professional tone that may seem a little stiff. But if you try
to write a novel or a creative writing piece for a historical research paper, it will be like
showing up for a job interview at a bank straight from the beach in a tank top, grubby
shorts, and flip-flops. Historical writing requires a professional presentation just like any
other professional work. This is not poetry, an op-ed in the local paper, or your personal
diary.

Says who? Declaring something as fact is not enough—support all of your arguments, and
even general statements, with evidence in the form of an endnote. Then be sure you’ve
made it clear WHY you think it is significant. Just saying that it is important does not make
it so.

Introduce quotes; do not just drop them in the middle of a paragraph. For example, “This
became clear when Roosevelt told Hay, 'Sir, we cannot tell the American people….' "

Use quotations like salt: too much ruins the “dish,” and too little can leave it bland.
Quotations can give your reader a sense of the person you are portraying or capture the
drama of the event. They can provide you with material that you can explain or unpack.
But always ask yourself the following question: “Why am I quoting this?” If the quotation
does not add anything to your analysis, if it does not provide a flavor of the era or provide
material for comment, then simply paraphrase or summarize. Quoting a simple fact is
pointless:
Sherman told Grant, “We need to have a meeting to plan the next campaign.”
7
There is nothing unique here. This could be easily put into your own words (citing
appropriately, of course) without anything lost.

People are “who,” not “that.” “She became known as the woman who….” NOT: “She
became known as the woman that….”

States, nations, corporations, and other impersonal institutions have no gender. “Germany
defended its interests….” NOT: “Germany defended her interests….”

Keep your tense uniform. Do not switch between present and past, etc. See the tip guide at
the USM History Lab page for more on that.

Make sure your pronoun refers to the correct person. Abigail Adams told her daughter,
Nabby, that she told John….” The “she” in that sentence refers to the most recent proper
noun, Nabby, and it is not supposed to in this situation. Rewrite a sentence like this to
clarify.

Be careful with words like “all,” “none,” “everyone,” etc. There is usually an exception to
the rule that cannot be included in your generalization. This does not mean that your work
should be timid but rather that you should make sure that any sweeping generalizations in
your work are grounded in historical evidence.

Read your paper aloud before submitting it. This should catch incomplete sentences, word
repetition, wordiness, and other common errors that can drop an A paper to a C or worse.

Study the “Checklist” in addition to digesting the material listed above. Check all of your
assignments against this information before submitting your work. I will grade it with the
understanding that you have read and understood these rules.

When writing a review, keep the focus on the author’s presentation of the person, event, etc.
Your job is to analyze their skill, not to retell the event in your own words.
For more great advice on historical writing, see the USM History Lab list of hints and other
writing tips at: http://www.usm.edu/history/HWL-guides.php. Also see the H-Net guideline
for reviews at: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/guidelines_books.php
Thanks to Dr. Susannah Ural, whose suggestions formed the basis for this hand-out.
8