The History Essay Handbook
Part I:
A short guide to writing history essays
Part II:
A short guide to style and referencing
in history essays
History Program
School of Social Sciences and Humanities
Murdoch University
(2007)
1
The History Essay Handbook
Part I:
A short guide to writing history essays
History Program
School of Social Sciences and Humanities
Murdoch University
(2007)
2
Part I: A Short Guide to Writing History Essays
Table of Contents
A. Introduction
B. Researching your essay
1. Getting started
Selecting an essay topic
Starting your research
Taking good notes
2. Sources
Primary sources
Secondary sources
Internet sources
C. Writing your essay
1. Argument
Three kinds of essay question
The thesis statement
2. Structure
Basic essay structure
‘Open’ and ‘closed’ essays
3. Writing and revising
Plan your essay
Revise your essay
Write like a historian
D. Assessment of essays
1. Assessment criteria
2. Grade level descriptions
E. Plagiarism
1. What is plagiarism?
2. Plagiarism and paraphrasing
Plagiarism in action: An actual case
3. How to avoid plagiarism
3
A. Introduction
Learning to write an engaging and persuasive essay that makes a sustained argument
is one of the chief skills that studying history will teach you. Writing good essays
involves work: inspiration and enthusiasm for a particular subject must be backed up
by diligent research, careful organisation and thoughtful contemplation of the ideas at
stake. At the same time, essay writing is also something of an art, in which your style
and ability matures with practice and experience. In a history essay, you are expected
to present a well-constructed and clearly expressed argument based on evidence and
analysis, usually as an answer to a specific question. History essays are thus more
than simple narrative accounts of the past; they should seek to persuade the reader.
The guidelines presented here hopefully will be of some assistance as you set about
that task.
This guide is intended for all students taking History units, though it will offer
different things to different students depending upon their background and previous
experience. Though there are obviously significant differences in expectations for Part
I, Part II, Honours and Postgraduate students in History, the essential principles of
good historical writing are the same for everyone.
4
B. Researching your essay
1. Getting started
Where to begin is often the single most difficult and anxiety-provoking issue for
students when they are confronted by a history essay, whether it is a short Part I paper
of 2,000 words or an Honours thesis of 20,000 words. However, some simple steps
can swiftly make the task seem less daunting.
Selecting an essay topic
This is perhaps the most important step of all, for it will affect almost every
other step you take in your research.
First and foremost, you should seek an essay topic that is interesting to you. A
topic that genuinely engages your interest ought to be fun to read and write about, and
will likely result in a better essay.
Second, make sure your topic is manageable in size. Subjects such as ‘The fall
of the Roman Empire’ and ‘The origins of the Second World War’ are the stuff of
books by professional historians, who take years to write them. You should aim at a
more limited and sharply focused essay topic.
Third, your essay topic should (at least in the first instance) preferably be
phrased in the form of a clearly defined question. For instance: ‘To what extent was
the fall of the Roman Empire caused by pressure from “barbarians” on the frontiers?’
or ‘Why did the Second World War break out in 1939 rather than 1938?’ Your essay’s
argument thus naturally becomes the answer to this question.
1.1
Starting your research
Your first step should be a visit to the library to search the catalogue for
books, journal articles, book reviews, documentary collections, etc., on your topic. In
particular, do not be afraid to go on the trail of relevant primary sources. If you are
having trouble, or want to expand your search, speak to a librarian—it is their main
aim in life to help people use their library as effectively as possible!
1.2
Evaluate your sources before you start taking notes from them. Examine their
bibliographies for additional sources you might consult. For books, the table of
contents and the index will help you to pinpoint relevant information, while the
preface and introduction often contain quick and easily accessible summaries of the
main argument. You may discover very quickly that a source with a title that appeared
extremely relevant to your topic is in fact not useful at all.
1.3
Getting an early start is vital for any university essay, and particularly for
history essays which require real research. You will need enough time to locate the
necessary sources for your research, to read them carefully and take detailed notes,
and only then to write and revise your essay. As the end of term approaches, the
demand for various books will increase and this could leave you without access to the
most useful sources for your essay topic. Don’t be caught out!
1.4
5
Taking good notes
Good note-taking is a focused and systematic process. From the very start of
your research, you should concentrate on answering the specific question contained in
your essay topic and not become bogged down in digressions or generalities. In
consequence, you should be sparing in the time-consuming process of recording direct
quotations in your notes, for they ought to be used sparingly in your essay. Instead,
for each source summarise the argument being made as you understand it in your own
words, along with the evidence that the author presents to support it. Be selective in
what you photocopy and be sure to read and annotate your copies as soon as possible
after making them: large piles of photocopied pages tend to remain undigested and
unused.
1.5
A good essay cannot be written from scrappy and unsystematic notes. Be
diligent in organising your research (by headings, marginal notes, colour codes or a
simple filing system) and indicating the exact source of each piece of information.
Being able to give accurate and informative references in your essay is part of
avoiding the problem of plagiarism and depends upon your having clear and accurate
notes—with any source the very first step is thus to note its full bibliographic details
and thereafter constantly to keep track of the page numbers from which you are
gathering information.
1.6
2. Sources
A history essay can only be as strong as the sources on which it is based. There are
two main types of sources that you will draw on as you conduct the research for your
essay: primary sources and secondary sources.
Primary sources
Primary sources are best defined as original documents or artefacts which date
from the time period of the topic on which you are writing. Thus, for an essay on the
origins of the First World War, primary sources might include: official government
documents from the major belligerent powers; personal diaries or letters, written at the
time by both political and military leaders and ordinary people; the descriptions of
events recorded in contemporary newspapers; photographs, maps, coins and stamps;
and even popular books or patriotic songs. While it is not always possible for
undergraduates to gain access to such sources, it is often much easier than students
believe. Government documents, for instance, are frequently available in official
published documentary collections: the Murdoch library holds the twelve volumes of
the series British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898-1914—a vast range of
official papers on British foreign policy. Additionally, in the internet age it is
becoming constantly easier to find documentary and visual sources on the web.
2.1
Primary sources form the basic building blocks of all historical writing.
Because the discipline of history is based upon interpretation, however, historians do
not take the evidence provided by primary sources at face value. They read and assess
each source critically—with the result that different historians often arrive at very
different conclusions about the meaning of the same source. You must be careful
about assuming that primary sources are somehow ‘true’ because they were created
2.2
6
by people of the time. People of any time have their own agendas, prejudices and
biases—whether overt or secret, conscious or unconscious—and these can shape or
distort the content and meaning of a source. As you evaluate any piece of evidence,
consider who created it and why, who was the intended audience, and what was the
historical context in which it was created and received.
Secondary sources
Secondary sources usually form the main or sole basis for the majority of
undergraduate essays. Secondary sources are best defined as books, articles and other
commentaries written later in time about a particular subject, most often by
professional and amateur historians or journalists, which interpret the nature and
significance of the primary sources. Secondary sources on the origins of the First
World War would include the vast number of books studying the events leading up to
August 1914; biographies of the major political and military figures of the time;
studies of popular opinion and attitudes towards war in the main European states;
more focused articles on specific questions published in journals such the English
Historical Review or War in History; modern maps detailing the movement of armies
during the build-up to war; book reviews which provide overviews and critiques of
the main developments in the study of the subject; and so on.
2.3
There are good and bad secondary sources for essays. Good secondary works
are firmly based upon a large range of relevant primary sources and have been
subjected to careful review before being published by reputable presses; bad ones tend
not to have been subjected to processes of scrutiny or are supported by only a weak
base of primary research. Thus, you should critically evaluate the usefulness of each
source as you proceed with your research. Who was the author and who was the
publisher? When was it published and who was the intended audience? Does it have
extensive footnotes and a relevant bibliography? What sorts of sources has the author
used to support their argument? What sorts of unspoken assumptions, or detectable
biases, might be at work? Is the argument still relevant? For example, you would read
an American book published in 1999 about relations between the United States and
the Soviet Union during the Second World War quite differently from a book on the
same subject published in Moscow in 1957.
2.4
Textbooks and encyclopaedias should not serve as the main sources for your
essay research. They are generally too basic, not well-referenced and provide only
facts without analysis. (On-line encyclopaedias are no more acceptable as sources for
research essays than are standard printed encyclopaedias—especially the worst
example of all, Wikipedia!) So, too, with works of ‘popular history’: though often fun
to read, they are not usually a good source for further research. Finally, neither should
your lecture notes serve as the foundation for your research—certainly never quote
from them in your essays!—for any important point made in a lecture should be
tracked down and explored in proper detail by you in published sources.
2.5
Internet sources
The internet in general is not a reliable or acceptable source for researching
history essays. The web is an unregulated medium and anybody, anywhere, can post
material that looks impressive and sounds authoritative. Just because the opinions
2.6
7
expressed on websites are ‘in print’ does not make them either true or reliable. At
most, on-line sources can provide thought-provoking or unexpected perspectives on
historical topics which must then be investigated further through reputable published
sources. At worst, however, and far more common, on-line sources are wildly
inaccurate, heavily distorted, biased or misleading, and unverifiable. Internet sources
are thus not acceptable as the basis of your research for any of your essays. As a
general rule, do not spend time on the web at the expense of the readings listed in
your unit guide.
Nevertheless, the internet does have some potential value for history students
in providing access to certain kinds of primary sources. Previously unobtainable
sources can now be found on the web, including: maps and technical plans; visual
sources such as photographs, cartoons and propaganda posters; original oral testimony
and witness statements; newspaper articles; and especially copies of original
government documents. It is worth noting that these sources are mostly available
through the web sites of credible institutions, usually universities, governments,
international organisations and museums, which allows for greater confidence in their
reliability and accuracy. For example, the official website of the United Nations is a
treasure trove of valuable primary material for students of post-1945 world history
and politics. Students are encouraged to investigate the possibilities provided by such
reputable sources and to put them to use in their research essays.
2.7
You should take the same critical approach to any internet source that you
would with any published source: be cautious, sceptical and thorough. Websites
which present a façade of respectability and impartiality may, under closer
investigation, be revealed as clandestine attempts to spread political-propaganda
messages. Please seek out guidance from your Unit Coordinator if you have any
concerns or questions about a website.
2.8
Some guidelines for assessing the credibility of internet sites







Is the site clearly identified?
Is it located at and administered by a governmental agency, university, or
other scholarly institution?
Is the author of the web page or document identified? Are there details of the
author’s qualifications and affiliations?
Is the posting process explained? Have items on this site been peer-reviewed?
Is there a date for when the information was created or last updated?
Is the item more opinion than information?
Is the item posted for potentially political, commercial or other reasons which
would damage its objectivity?
8
C. Writing your essay
1. Argument
Three kinds of essay question
A history essay calls for an argument, especially essays where the topic is
phrased in the subject of a question. As the first step in formulating your argument,
you should begin by establishing in your own mind exactly what you are being asked
to argue about. Read the question carefully to determine what is being asked, what
sorts of assumptions and preconceptions it includes, what its terms mean, and what
sorts of responses you can make (supporting, rejecting, revising, etc.). Most historical
questions or problems are debatable, meaning that there is no single or simple answer
to them. Take the time to decide in your own mind what you genuinely think about a
subject, and what you genuinely believe to be the answer to a particular question or
problem. One way to approach this process is to consider the distinction between
descriptive, analytical and critical essays.
1.1
The descriptive essay is appropriate for cases where you have been asked to
describe a particular event, problem, book, author, etc. You might be asked ‘What
happened during the Stalinist Terror of the 1930s?’ or ‘What is Ian Kershaw’s view of
the changes in German foreign policy during 1938-39?’ In the first case, you would
structure your essay as a summary of the events of the Terror, based on various
primary and secondary sources, reporting on its scale, events and mechanisms. In the
second case, you would consult Kershaw’s books and in your essay summarise the
various changes in German foreign policy that he outlines. The descriptive essay can
be useful therefore, but it is limited. In both of these examples, while the summaries
would provide accurate descriptions, they would not really advance our historical
understanding of why the Stalinist Terror was so significant or of what Kershaw’s
books have contributed to the scholarship on German foreign policy.
1.2
The analytical essay is perhaps the most common sort of essay confronted by
students. Here you take on questions that require individual judgement and analysis in
order to give an adequate answer. You might be asked ‘How central was Stalin’s role
in the Terror of the 1930s?’ or ‘What are the most important features of Kershaw’s
interpretation of Hitler’s foreign policy in the late 1930s?’ In the first case, you would
need to make a reasoned judgement regarding the responsibility of a single individual
(Stalin) for a massively complex and geographically widespread process of murder
and repression. How do you define ‘terror’ and ‘responsibility’? What other factors
might have been responsible for these horrific events? What sort of evidence is
necessary to prove Stalin’s responsibility? For the second case, you might begin by
considering how to select certain interpretations as more important than others. What
criteria can you develop to discriminate between them? On which points does
Kershaw himself lay the most stress? Which elements of his interpretation are
accepted by other historians, and which are rejected? Where do you think Kershaw’s
interpretation is strongest, and where is it weakest? Such analytical approaches
produce essays that make arguments about how to assess historical events and
interpretations; they require you to analyse the relevant material, to make judgements
and to defend them.
1.3
9
The critical essay is less common and more challenging, but is perhaps the
most interesting sort of essay. It asks you to critically evaluate a book, school of
interpretation or approach to a problem from a historiographical point of view. You
might be asked ‘Are the “intentionalist” school of historians right to blame Stalin
alone for the 1930s Terror?’ or ‘Do you find Kershaw’s interpretation of Hitler’s
command over German foreign policy convincing?’ These questions require you to
master the relevant historical literature—the ‘intentionalist’ vs. ‘structuralist’ debate
in Soviet history or the development of Kershaw’s portrayal of Hitler as Führer—and
then to develop your own criteria of evaluation. The critical essay necessarily extends
beyond the frame of reference of the subject or book you are considering and places it
within the larger historiography of the topic. A critical reading seeks out omissions
and contradictions, assesses the strengths and weaknesses in the use of evidence or
argument, and makes an evaluation of the historical debate or the individual author’s
approach. While students sometimes see this as an exercise only in identifying things
that they can condemn, a true critical reading is really about evaluating an argument
and can often result in an entirely positive assessment.
1.4
The thesis statement
Your ‘thesis statement’ is the central idea or argument that your essay is
setting out to prove. It is the answer to the question that you have set for yourself in
the essay. As such, it is the focus for the entire essay and all the relevant evidence that
you have assembled during your research will be directed to supporting it. A poor
thesis statement is one whose argument is obvious to the reader and does not stand in
need of proof, or alternatively one which cannot be proved. A good thesis statement is
one whose argument is interesting and even aggressive, sustainable by proof, and
clearly and concisely focused. Consider the following examples:
1.5
The First World War was a conflict between European powers. This statement
contains a weak, self-evident generality without an argument to be proven.
The First World War was the result of various international power struggles in
Europe. This statement is slightly better, but still too broad and without an interesting
or particularly meaningful argument.
Contrary to popular belief, the First World War was primarily caused by the imperial
rivalries of the great powers as they clashed in their struggle to establish or protect
their power outside of Europe. This statement contains a distinct argument, takes a
strong position, stands in need of proof, and clearly lays out where its focus will be.
Formulating your thesis statement is thus a critical part of the writing process.
Unfortunately, it also often seems rather intimidating. Student writers too frequently
are stuck in the mindset that they have nothing important, insightful or original to say
about a topic. But this is not so. If you have studied a subject closely, read about it
across a range of sources and spent time genuinely thinking about it, it is almost
impossible not to end up with a worthwhile set of opinions and conclusions. As you
research your topic, you should jot down your thoughts, ideas and responses to the
material you read; such active thinking about the material will steadily clarify your
own opinion on the question being asked.
1.6
10
You can arrive at real insights from surprisingly modest beginnings. For
example, ‘Stalin was a psycho’ is not much of a historical argument; it is merely an
expression of an immature and lazy attitude. And yet, real research and reflection on
Stalin’s personal cruelty and murderous policies can produce an excellent essay that
makes a nuanced argument about whether he was indeed driven by a psychopathic
personality disorder, as some historians have argued was the case, or in fact was
motivated by a totalitarian ideology that placed the needs of state and party above the
rights or happiness of individuals, as other historians have asserted. In doing so, you
will have converted a first impression into a genuine piece of scholarship.
1.7
2. Structure
Basic essay structure
Newspaper articles and even television reports, it seems, always abide by the
famous ‘three rules of journalism’: (1) tell them what you’re going to tell them; (2)
tell them; (3) tell them what you told them! While this is overstated, the traditional
essay structure nevertheless also runs along the same general lines. It is classically
divided into three parts: the introduction, the main body, and the conclusion.
2.1
In your introduction do not simply repeat or rephrase the question; give your
answer to it! This means that it should include a clear and direct thesis statement. You
should lay out how you intend to address the subject and what your main lines of
argument will be. You should also establish the chronological or thematic parameters
of your essay, and provide definitions of all critical terms or concepts. The best
introductions, in fact, are often the last part of the essay to be written, when the essay
is essentially complete. The reason is that it is only then, when your argument has
been fully developed and clearly laid out, that you can present a precise and accurate
introductory description of it. Even so, you should begin with a working draft of your
introduction, which you can then revise in the light of your eventual conclusions.
2.2
The main body of your essay should be a systematic working through of the
evidence you have compiled in support of your argument, usually arranged around
three or four main points. (You might also need to take time to address evidence or
arguments which appear to disprove your argument.) How you organise the main
body of your essay ultimately will depend on the type of argument you are making
and the nature of the evidence you are presenting. But in all cases, strive for a clear
grouping of the different strands of your argument, even if it must be as blunt as
writing: ‘first’ …, ‘second’ …, ‘third’ …, and so on. Use paragraphs intelligently to
help structure your essay.
2.3
In writing your conclusion, it is usual to summarise (not simply repeat!) the
key points and evidence that have been presented and to restate the essay’s argument.
But an essay’s conclusion should also go beyond merely re-stating the points already
made—rather, it should deal with genuine conclusions. Now that you have proved
your case, what does it tell you? What wider ideas, insights or implications does your
argument suggest? What lessons might we draw from the brilliant job of research and
analysis that you have performed? Be honest: if some of your original ideas were not
supported by the evidence, point this out; make clear where the evidence was too
inconclusive to allow for absolute or firm conclusions; and so on.
2.4
11
‘Open’ and ‘closed’ essay structures
As you consider how to structure your essay, it may be useful to think about
the differences between two quite different approaches to structuring history essays,
which can be called the closed argument and the open argument.
2.5
An essay with a closed argument moves from the general to the specific, as it
steadily narrows the subject down to a specific answer. In structure, it begins with an
introduction that lays out in general terms the problem being investigated; the main
body of the essay then works through a chain of evidence dealing with the chief issues
at stake; and finally, only in the conclusion, is a specific answer to the essay’s
question arrived at. The closed argument is thus workmanlike, dependable, and sticks
closely to the point.
2.6
An essay with an open argument, by contrast, moves from the specific to the
general, as it begins with a direct answer to the essay’s question and steadily expands
its discussion of the subject. In structure, it begins with a sharply-defined thesis
statement that answers the exact question asked; the main body of the essay then
systematically proceeds from point to point, presenting evidence to support its
specific thesis; the conclusion, finally, goes beyond merely restating the thesis and
instead considers the wider implications of the argument being made. The open
argument is thus more ambitious, discursive and difficult to pull off.
2.7
3. Writing and revising
Plan your essay
The first thing to do is to prepare an outline of your essay. You may find when
you first sit down to do this that you are not yet exactly sure of what it is that you
want to argue—in this case you are not ready to start writing! You should instead
continue a bit longer with your research and, perhaps even more importantly, with
your reflection on the topic. Unfortunately, too many students begin writing without
any clear sense of what they actually want to say. The results are predictable. Their
introduction is weak and vague, providing the reader with no clear thesis statement
and instead wasting time simply rephrasing the question. The main body of their essay
wanders aimlessly, repeating itself and not marshalling evidence in a systematic
fashion to frame a coherent argument. Their conclusion, when they finally come to the
end, is boringly repetitive and often the first and only place where the reader is
confronted with an answer to the question being addressed. Don’t fall into this trap!
3.1
An outline is simply a road map that ensures your essay has a clear thesis
statement, is coherently organised, and contains all the evidence necessary to prove
your argument. Your outline can be simple or extremely detailed, but it should still be
framed around the three essential components of all essays: the introduction, the main
body and the conclusion. Draft a simple introduction (1 paragraph) that states your
position as clearly and concisely (even bluntly!) as possible. Then set down as bullet
points what your key assertions will be in support of your position and note the main
pieces of evidence you plan to use to support each one. Finally, for the conclusion,
consider (in preliminary terms at least) some of the possible implications and wider
considerations that your essay’s argument addresses.
3.2
12
Revise your essay
You should allow yourself time to write and then rewrite your essay. Real
revision means not being afraid to take what you have written and genuinely tear it
apart to make it better. If possible, once the first draft of your paper is complete, put it
aside for a few days and then return to it with a fresh, analytical eye. You will quickly
spot ways in which it needs revision.
3.3
Revision means asking yourself tough questions. Do you really know exactly
what it is you are trying to argue? (If not, clarify this in your own mind and then make
sure the essay expresses it clearly.) Do you repeat yourself in places? (You need to
rework the structure and delete some material.) Do the particular parts of your essay
work together to make a single coherent argument? (Consider how you can best
structure your argument so that it hangs together systematically and logically.) Are
there places where you fail to prove your point sufficiently well? (You will need to
gather more evidence to strengthen your case.) Are the format and style of referencing
clear and consistent throughout the essay? (Check the guidelines in Part II of the
History Essay Handbook.) Are there any spelling, punctuation, grammar and other
stylistic errors? (You need to proof read carefully: careless errors and sloppy
presentation will always undermine how your essay is received, no matter how
brilliant the argument might be.)
3.4
Write like a historian
Good writing style is an integral part of strong history essays. As a general
rule, try to be direct, clear and engaging in your writing. Assume you are writing for
an audience that is mature, intelligent and interested—exactly like yourself. Do not
assume that your readers will know things without having to be told: if you or a
fellow student would require a concept to be explained or term defined, then do so for
your reader.
3.5
Don’t try to constantly hedge your bets—be decisive and take a stand. This
means addressing the question that is being asked. Don’t wander off into irrelevancies
but pose the question clearly and make your answer precise and persuasive.
3.6
Strive for precision. This means resisting the impulse to descend into vague
statements and sweeping generalizations. Impossibly broad statements—such as ‘The
devastation on the Eastern Front was extreme and affected the lives of many
people’—end up proving nothing in themselves. At the same time, definite assertions
still require the support of specific detail as evidence: factual detail; statistics;
quotations from individuals or documents of the time; and (least effective) quotations
from historians. Here an example of how a general assertion might be backed up with
specific detail as evidence:
3.7
Hitler was lazy. The most obvious example can be seen in his working habits when
Führer. He never emerged from his private rooms before midday, took enormously
lengthy meals, and generally stayed up until about 2 a.m. watching films before going
to bed. As Alan Bullock notes, Hitler ‘hated systematic work, hated to submit to any
discipline … and he habitually left as much as he could to others’.1
13
Avoid ‘fluff’! Meaningless qualifications and ‘filler’ statements—such as ‘thus
one can see that’ or ‘having shown this first point, next this second point will be
discussed’—merely weaken your essay. Avoid weak phrases like “In my opinion’ or
‘It seems to me’: the reader knows already that ideas and assertions expressed in your
essay are your own opinion, so drop the weak preface and be emphatic. For example:
‘In my opinion, Lenin was just as brutal a dictator as Stalin’ is weaker than ‘Lenin
was just as brutal a dictator as Stalin’.
3.8
14
D. Assessment of essays
It may be useful to you to have a clearer sense of the basic criteria by which history
essays are evaluated and how the different grade levels are categorised. As you revise
your essay, you might consider the questions and the criteria listed below.
1. Assessment criteria
Knowledge. This essentially covers the research you have done. Does the essay
demonstrate adequate reading? Does it cover the topic with no major or obvious
omissions? Does the essay support its argument with sufficient and appropriate evidence?
Does it keep a clear focus on the most significant points and develop these in sufficient
detail? Is there a good range of sources employed in the footnotes/endnotes and listed in
the bibliography?
1.1
Analysis. This essentially deals with your essay’s argument. Do you understand
and answer the question asked directly and fully? Have you grasped the key historical
issues at stake? Do you show an understanding of the arguments and interpretations of
other historians on this topic? Have you evaluated the evidence critically? Does your
argument take objections and alternative views into account? In general, do you present a
coherent and analytical argument?
1.2
Structure. This essentially deals with the way your essay is organised. Is your
argument stated clearly in the introduction? Is there a clear and systematic sense of form
of organization to your essay? Have you achieved a good balance between narrative and
analysis? Have you successfully supported your general points with appropriate specific
evidence? Are the points made in a clear order and effectively linked into a smoothly
flowing essay? Does the essay avoid irrelevance or repetition?
1.3
Presentation. This essentially covers the style of your writing and the technical
aspects of your submitted work. Have you written in clear and correct English, without
too many small errors of spelling, punctuation or grammar? Have you included accurate
and correctly formatted references throughout your essay? Have you used quotations
correctly? Does it have a proper bibliography? Is the essay of the correct length?
1.4
2. Grade level descriptions
High Distinction. Excellent work. The essay contains a clearly defined
argument which not only answers the question but addresses its deeper implications.
There is extensive evidence, drawn from a wide range of sources, which is used in
interesting ways that demonstrate the author fully understands it. The essay shows an
ability to question the authority of sources and to weigh their relative merits and
value, where necessary identifying and discussing apparent contradictions. The essay
is elegantly written, very well structured and shows original insight by the author.
‘HD’ thus represents a piece of writing that is enjoyable to read, essentially difficult to
fault and the best sort of effort that could be expected by a student at this level.
2.1
Distinction. Very good work. The essay contains a clearly defined argument
which displays an understanding of the question and deploys relevant evident to
2.2
15
answer it, drawing upon a good range of sources. The analysis is strong and sustained,
though it may in places fall short by employing inadequate evidence, failing to
explore all the implications of the evidence cited or drawing less impressive
conclusions. The essay is well-written, though it may still contain minor structural
problems. ‘D’ thus represents a very strong piece of writing that is intelligent,
informative and readable, though it will not have quite the polish of ‘HD’ work.
Credit. Good work. The essay answers the question adequately, though the
argument overlooks key points or is inadequately focused on the specific question
under discussion. There may be a tendency to state ideas rather than to analyse them,
or to have the argument rest on unsupported claims. The essay is likely to be based
upon a modest range of sources. Though coherently written, it may contain stylistic or
structural problems. ‘C’ thus represents ‘creditable’ work: a sound piece of writing
that shows the student has clearly done the work required to an acceptable standard
though there will be areas that require significant growth and improvement.
2.3
Pass. Adequate work. The essay is acceptable as it provides a basic answer to
the question and meets the minimum objectives of the assignment. At a minimum, it
will be written in a clear and coherent fashion, be correctly referenced, and be based
upon a sufficient number of sources. However, the essay likely contains only a basic
argument and has too little analysis, instead presenting factual data as an end in itself.
There also may be real misunderstandings of the main issues and the material being
considered. The essay may have significant stylistic or structural problems. ‘P’ thus
represents a piece of work that meets the minimal objectives of the assignment, but
leaves substantial room for improvement in terms of research, analysis and essay
structure.
2.4
Fail. Inadequate or unacceptable work. The essay makes no attempt to develop
a sustained argument in response to the question. There is little or no analysis and it
makes unsupported assertions backed by vague, distorted or inaccurate evidence. The
essay may be inadequate in terms of length, likely uses an insufficient number of
sources, and is very poorly written. Work in this category may include: an essay
which merely gives a chronicle of events without any analysis; an essay based entirely
or substantially upon inadequate sources, including internet sources or unit lectures;
an essay that is so structurally, stylistically or grammatically awkward as to be
unreadable. ‘N’ thus represents work that does not meet the minimum standards
expected of university-level students.
2.5
16
E. Plagiarism
1. What is plagiarism?
‘Plagiarism’ involves taking and using someone else’s work, thoughts or
writings and representing them as your own. Using the work of another person
without indicating by referencing (and by quotation marks when exact phrases or
passages are borrowed) that the ideas expressed are not your own is a form of
cheating: in effect, it is literary theft. Any use of ideas and information taken from
other authors must be acknowledged.
1.1
Classic examples of plagiarism include: copying another student’s work; using
an author’s exact words without putting them in quotation marks and citing the
source; and using an author’s ideas without proper acknowledgement.
The first case, copying another student’s work, constitutes plain dishonesty for
which there can be no acceptable defence.
The second case, using a passage from an author without clearly identifying
the words as a quotation, essentially involves the careless error or deliberate deception
of trying to pass off someone else’s work as your own. There is very little defence for
such actions either—as a university student you are expected to know how to take
accurate notes, how to employ quotation marks, and how to properly reference all
quotations. If you use a direct quotation, the passage must always appear in quotation
marks, with the appropriate reference given.
The third case, using an author’s ideas without proper acknowledgement, is
more problematic. Compiling the views of other people and passing them off as one’s
own writing is not legitimate academic practice. All paraphrases of sources which go
into your essays must be followed by a reference to the source that is as clear and
precise as those provided for direct quotations.
1.2
2. Plagiarism and Paraphrasing
Paraphrasing means rephrasing another author’s arguments or findings in your
own words: as such, it is a common element of historical research. The obvious
danger here is if a passage from a source is paraphrased too closely, such as with only
a word changed here and there—this also constitutes plagiarism. When you
paraphrase, be sure you are not just rearranging or replacing a few words. Instead,
read over carefully the passage in the original that you want to paraphrase and then
write out what you think it means, using your own words. If you feel that any phrases
or sentences from the original are so precise and to the point that you cannot think of a
better way to put the idea, consider using it as a quotation.
2.1
Correct paraphrasing is something which students often wonder about. Here is
an example of an original source, followed by three versions of how it might be
paraphrased in an essay: the first two constitute plagiarism, the third is acceptable
paraphrasing.
2.2
17
Original source. J. M. Roberts, History of the World (New York, 1976), p. 845.
The joker in the European pack was Italy. For a time, hopes were entertained of her as
a force against Germany, but these disappeared under Mussolini. In 1935 Italy made a
belated attempt to participate in the scramble for Africa by invading Ethiopia. It was
clearly a breach of the Covenant of the League of Nations for one of its members to
attack another. France and Great Britain, the Mediterranean powers, and the African
powers were bound to take the lead against Italy at the League. But they did so feebly
and half-heartedly because they did not want to alienate a possible ally against
Germany. The result was the worst possible: the League failed to check aggression,
Ethiopia lost her independence, and Italy was alienated after all.
Version A. Plagiarism. Entire phrases are taken from the source without footnoting.
Italy, one might say, was the joker in the European deck. When she invaded Ethiopia,
it was clearly a breach of the Covenant of the League of Nations, yet the efforts of
England and France to take the lead against her were feeble and half-hearted. It
appears that those great powers had no wish to alienate a possible ally against Hitler’s
rearmed Germany.
Version B. Plagiarism. Exact words from the original are still not given as quotes.
Italy was the joker in the European deck. Under Mussolini in 1935, she made a
belated attempt to participate in the scramble for Africa by invading Ethiopia. As J.M.
Roberts points out, this violated the Covenant of the League of Nations.1 But France
and Britain, not wanting to alienate a possible ally against Germany, put up only
feeble and half-hearted opposition to the Ethiopian adventure. The outcome, Roberts
observes, was the worst possible: ‘the League failed to check aggression, Ethiopia lost
her independence, and Italy was alienated after all’.2
1
2
J. M. Roberts, History of the World (New York, 1976), p. 845.
Ibid.
Version C. Acceptable. Writer is incorporating elements from the source material as
part of his/her own argument, not merely rephrasing the original. Direct quotes are
footnoted.
Germany’s dominance within Europe during the 1930s was by no means a foregone
conclusion, for the balance of power might just as easily have been tipped against
Hitler if Fascist Italy had not gravitated towards an alliance with Berlin. Such an
alliance was not inevitable; the British and French governments both muted their
criticism of Mussolini’s Ethiopian invasion in the hope of remaining friends with
Italy. They opposed the Italians in the League of Nations, as J.M. Roberts observes,
‘feebly and half-heartedly because they did not want to alienate a possible ally against
Germany’.1 It is possible to imagine alternative circumstances where Italy, France,
and Britain retained a common interest in preserving stability in Europe, despite
ideological differences, and so jointly restrained Hitler from his diplomatic adventures
of the later 1930s.
1
J. M. Roberts, History of the World (New York, 1976), p. 845.
18
Plagiarism in action: An actual case
This first passage comes from the introduction to Mark Raeff, The Decembrists,
published in 1966:
December 14, 1825, was the day set for taking the oath of allegiance to the new
Emperor, Nicholas I. Only a few days earlier, on November 27, when news of the death
of Alexander I had reached the capital, an oath of allegiance had been taken to Nicholas’s
older brother, Grand Duke Constantine, Viceroy of Poland. But in accordance with the
act of renunciation he had made in 1819, Constantine had refused the crown. The virtual
interregnum stirred society and produced uneasiness among the troops, and the
government was apprehensive of disorders and disturbances. Police agents reported the
existence of secret societies and rumours of a coup to be staged by regiments of the
Guards. The new Emperor was anxious to have the oath taken as quickly and quietly as
possible. The members of the central government institutions—Council of State, Senate,
Ministries—took the oath without incident, early in the morning. In most regiments of
the garrison the oath was also taken peaceably.
This second passage comes from the introduction to G.R.V. Barratt, The Decembrist
Memoirs, published in 1974.
December 14, 1825, was the day on which the Guards’ regiments in Petersburg
were to swear solemn allegiance to Nicholas I, the new Emperor. Less than three weeks
before, when news of the death of Alexander I had reached the capital from Taganrog on
the sea of Azov, an oath, no less solemn and binding, had been taken to Nicholas’s elder
brother, the Grand Duke Constantine, Viceroy of Poland. Constantine, however, had
declined to be emperor, in accordance with two separate acts of renunciation made in
1819 and, secretly, in 1822. The effective interregnum caused uneasiness both in society
and in the army. The government feared undefined disorders—with some reason, since
police agents reported the existence of various clandestine groups and rumours of a coup
to be effected by guardsmen. Nicholas was anxious that the oath be sworn to him
promptly and quietly. At first it would seem that he would have his way; senators,
ministers, and members of the Council of State took the oath by 9 am. In most regiments
of the garrison the oath was also taken peaceably.
It was not long before reviewers spotted the similarities! This is a classic case of
paraphrasing as plagiarism: while Barratt changed, added and rearranged words,
nevertheless he still drew directly from Raeff’s work throughout. Remember that it is
not enough merely to change the order of a few words or sentences, or to add a few
phrases or sentences of your own—such close borrowing is still plagiarism.
3. How to avoid plagiarism
Give yourself enough time to do your essay. Very rarely do students start out
deliberately intending to commit plagiarism. Instead, they fall into the trap because
they are desperate to meet an impending deadline and become careless or make bad
choices. You can avoid this by getting started early and giving yourself sufficient time
to research and write your essays.
3.1
19
Take full and accurate notes. One of the most common explanations from
students who have made improper use of sources is that they mixed up their notes and
could not tell the difference between their own thoughts and those of their sources.
You should always take notes in a way that lets you distinguish at a glance your own
thoughts from ideas and words that you have copied from others. For a start, put
everything that comes directly from another source in quotation marks. Always write
down the full bibliographical and page information for the sources of such quotations,
so that the information is handy when you compile the references for your essay.
3.2
Learn how to cite evidence correctly. In history essays it is not merely
expected but essential that you should draw upon the research and interpretations of
other historians as you put together your argument. What is required, however, is that
properly acknowledge the source of this material, via a reference such as a footnote or
endnote. The best place to start is by carefully reading the sections in Part II of the
History Essay Handbook on using quotations and on how and when to use footnotes
and endnotes. If you have any doubts about how to refer to the work of others in your
assignments, please consult your Tutor or Unit Coordinator for help.
3.3
20
The History Essay Handbook
Part II:
A short guide to style and referencing
in history essays
History Program
School of Social Sciences and Humanities
Murdoch University
(2007)
21
Part II: A Short Guide to Style and Referencing in History Essays
Table of Contents
A. Introduction
B. Writing style in history essays
1. Essay presentation
2. Spelling, Punctuation and Capitals
3. Numbers and Dates
4. Sentences and Paragraphs
5. Language
6. Quotations
Examples of the proper use of quotations
C. Footnotes and endnotes
1. Basic rules
2. What to footnote?
3. Books
4. Journal articles,
5. Book chapters and documentary collections
6. Internet sites and oral/audiovisual sources
D. Bibliographies
1. Basic rules
2. Books
3. Journal articles
4. Book chapters
5. Internet sites and oral/audiovisual sources
E. Appendices
1. Reference Guide Summary Sheet
2. Sample ‘mini-essay’ with footnotes and commentary
3. Sample bibliography
4. Further resources
22
A. Introduction
This guide is intended to give students in History units some guidance in terms of
proper writing and referencing style for history essays. Developing good writing style
is important. The notes here relate to the proper use of language and the general
format of history essays. Referencing is another important element of history essays.
You should not become fixated on the process of referencing at the expense of your
primary focus on the essay itself. As a general rule, it is better to spend time on the
content of the essay and expanding your research rather than worrying about whether
your footnotes or bibliography are in the exactly right format. That said, learning how
to properly reference an essay and how to compose clear and accurate references is an
important part of the writing process in history. So it is worth devoting some part of
your time to understanding why and how to reference your essays correctly.
For a short summary of the correct format for all the most common sorts of sources
employed in history essays, see Appendix 1: ‘Reference Guide Summary Sheet’.
23
B. Writing style in history essays
1. Essay presentation
It is expected that all essays will normally be word processed on a computer and
printed on A4 paper, on one side of the page only, with ample margins on all sides
and in a standard font type and size.
1.1
All written work should be double-spaced, except for the footnotes/endnotes and
the bibliography, which should be single spaced. All pages should be numbered
consecutively, including the title page and bibliography.
1.2
Your essay should have a title page containing the following information: your
name; the essay’s title; the unit number and name; the assignment/question number;
the date; the name of your tutor and time of your tutorial. Note that this title page is in
addition to the History Program cover sheet.
1.3
Your essay should make appropriate use of references (footnotes or endnotes) to
demonstrate the sources for your information and include a properly formatted
bibliography, which lists all the relevant sources used.
1.4
2. Spelling, Punctuation and Capitals
Spelling. As a general guideline, spelling should follow the Australian
Concise Oxford Dictionary (4th edn., Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 2004). Use
Australian/British forms of spelling in preference to American forms (e.g. use ‘-ise’
not ‘-ize’ and ‘-our’ not ‘-or’.) By all means, use a computer spelling checker on your
essay, but always carefully proofread your essay for spelling mistakes. (Your spell
checker would have no problem with the following sentence: ‘Width the attack on
Poland, the wad had begun.’)
2.1
Punctuation. Always proofread your essay for punctuation errors. The most
common errors include the misuse of apostrophes (e.g. be sure you know the
difference between Nazi’s, Nazis’ and Nazis) and semi-colons (e.g. ‘The semi-colon
is simple to use; it separates two main clauses’).
2.2
Capitalisation. Be sparing in your use of capitals. Other than for proper names,
use capitals generally only where lower case would create ambiguity. You should be
consistent in your use of capitalization for the titles of works in your footnotes and
bibliography.
2.3
Acronyms. The names of government agencies, associations, unions and other
such organisations are often abbreviated. In general, these acronyms should be in full
capitals with no periods between the letters. For example: UN, YMCA, USSR.
2.4
3. Numbers and Dates
Numbers less than 100 should be written out in full (e.g. twenty-five; fiftysixth anniversary). Numbers over 100 should be given in figures, except for round
3.1
24
numbers (e.g. 276; five thousand). Use figures with a succession of numbers or a
series of statistics (e.g. ‘There were 16 representatives, 5 union officials, and 102
members’).
Dates are best written in the form ‘day, month, year’ (e.g. 11 November 1918;
30 January 2007). However, whatever style you adopt for dates, what is important is
that you use it consistently throughout your essay.
3.2
For decades, write them out without an apostrophe (e.g. 1870s, 1930s). For
centuries, it is best practice to write them out in full (e.g. ‘nineteenth century’), though
the brief numerical form is acceptable (e.g. ‘19th century’). Never use the shorthand
form (e.g. ‘C19’).
3.3
4. Sentences and Paragraphs
Sentences. Your essay should be written in proper sentences. Always carefully
proofread your essay for common sentence errors, including incomplete sentences and
run-on sentences. Do not write any of your essay in note form and never use bulletpoints.
4.1
Paragraphs. The first line of each paragraph should be indented. Because your
essay should always be double-spaced, it is not necessary to leave a line between
paragraphs. Paragraphs should not consist of a single sentence, but rather should
group together material and evidence in a logical fashion that helps the reader to
follow your argument. Well-designed paragraphs (generally of 4-6 sentences) are an
integral part of your essay’s structure and should be used to help the reader to follow
your argument. Try to make the first sentence in each paragraph (the ‘topic sentence’)
a punchy introduction to the content of that paragraph.
4.2
5. Language
Past Tense. History essays should be written consistently in the past tense. Use
the present tense only for contemporary events (that is, events occurring ‘at the
present time’).
5.1
Personal pronoun. Use of the personal pronoun (‘I’) is permissible, but do so
in moderation. Try to avoid frequent use of phrases such as ‘I think that’.
5.2
Contractions. Avoid contractions: write do not rather than don’t. And please
remember the difference between its (possessive) and it’s (‘it is’)!
5.3
Slang. Avoid slang, clichés and meaningless generalities: these are tiresome.
(For example: ‘The First World War was horrible’ or ‘In 1914, Europe was going to
hell in a hand-basket’.)
5.4
Whenever possible, use the active rather than passive voice. Passive writing
tends to be weaker, more wordy and less to the point than writing that is assertive,
concise and direct. (For example, ‘Trotsky opposed the move’ is better than ‘The
move was opposed by Trotsky’.)
5.5
25
6. Quotations
Essays must be your own work: that is, they are presentations of your own
arguments and ideas. Quotations are thus tools to reinforce your argument—and not to
save you from having to make it! Avoid long slabs of quotations: a ‘cut and paste’
collection of long quotations connected together only in the most cursory fashion is
not acceptable as an essay. So when should you employ quotations? Use them to
illustrate assertions that you are making in your argument; to enliven your narrative
with interesting descriptions and first-hand descriptions of events; to provide the
authentic voices of people from the past. At the same time, never assume that the
quotation makes the point by itself and without any need of your own analysis.
6.1
Format. Present quotations in the same font size and type as you have used for
the rest of your essay. Do not put quotations into a different font, into a smaller font
size, into boldface type or into italics. Quotations in the main text should be enclosed
in single quotation marks; for quotations within other quotations, use double quotation
marks. (For example: ‘Mussolini was not the first person to proclaim that “Fascism is
totalitarianism”, but he was the loudest.’)
6.2
Short and long quotations. Short quotations of three lines or less (approx. fifty
words) should go in the text.
Long quotations (more than about 50 words) should be set up as ‘block’
quotations. These should be (i) indented an extra step from the left margin, (ii) singlespaced, and (iii) without quotation marks. (See the examples below.)
6.3
Accuracy. All direct quotations must repeat the exact spelling and punctuation
of the original source. Any mistakes, strange spellings or odd turns of phrase in the
original source should be reproduced in your quote, but marked by inserting in square
brackets the Latin expression ‘sic’ (which means ‘in this manner’) at the appropriate
place. This shows the reader that the apparent mistake derives from the original
source.
6.4
‘The Third [sic] World War began in 1914.’1
Editorial insertions. Words inserted into a quotation to clarify a reference or
the grammar must always be enclosed in square brackets, to identify them as your
own insertion.
6.5
‘By the time of the remilitarization of the Rhineland [in 1936], even among
those who had not voted for him before he became Chancellor, he [Hitler]
enjoyed the support of the overwhelming mass of the German people.’1
Ellipsis. Whenever material has been left out from an original quotation, this
must be indicated by three periods, known as an ‘ellipsis’. The main reason for using
ellipsis points is to select only the most important part of the quotation. Note that you
do not need to use ellipsis points before the start or after the end of a quotation.
6.6
‘By the time of the remilitarization of the Rhineland … he enjoyed the support
of the overwhelming mass of the German people.’1
26
Examples of the proper use of quotations
Original source (account by Lieutenant James Halloran of the battle of Trafalgar)
‘A shot struck the muzzle of the gun at which I was stationed (the aftermost gun on
the larboard side of the lower deck), and killed or wounded everyone stationed there,
myself and Midshipman Tompkins excepted. The shot was a very large one, and split
into a number of sherds, each of which took its own victim. We threw the mangled
body of John Jolley, a marine, out of the stern port, his stoumach being shot away; the
other sufferers we left to be examined. The gun itself was split, and our second
lieutenant Roskruge, who came down at that moment with some orders, advised me to
leave the gun as useless.’
Short quotation integrated into essay text
The fighting was vicious. A shot struck the muzzle of Lieutenant Halloran’s gun and
‘killed or wounded everyone there’ except for Halloran and a midshipman. There was
no time for sentiment. They ‘threw the mangled body of John Jolley, a marine, out of
the stern port, his stoumach [sic] being shot away’, before continuing with the battle.1
Long ‘block’ quotation within essay text
In a letter to his brother written just after the battle, Lieutenant Halloran made clear
the ferocity of the fighting:
A shot struck the muzzle of the gun at which I was stationed … and killed or
wounded everyone stationed there, myself and Midshipman Tompkins excepted.
The shot was a very large one, and split into a number of sherds [sic], each of
which took its own victim. We threw the mangled body of … [one of the
victims] out of the stern port … [and] the other sufferers we left to be examined.
The gun itself was split…1
Tragically, Halloran was himself killed some days later when a mast was blown away
during the ensuing hurricane.
A final point …
ALWAYS PROOF READ YOUR WORK
27
C. Footnotes and endnotes
1. Basic rules
When sitting down to write your history essay, you will turn to the material
you have collected during your research in relevant books, articles and other sources.
As this material is incorporated into your essay—whether in the form of direct
quotations, paraphrases or statistical or other data—you will need to provide
references to show the reader the sources for your information. These references both
acknowledge that the information was first put forth by someone else and provide
evidentiary support for the claims your essay is making. A clear reference points the
reader to the exact place where the information in question may be found and allows
readers to assess the strength of the evidence for themselves. While there are a
number of different styles of referencing used in the social sciences, for all of them
the critical point is that references must be clear, precise, complete and consistent.
1.1
The most common system of referencing for writing in history, and the one
used in the History Program at Murdoch University, is generally known as the
‘Cambridge system’ or the ‘footnotes/endnotes’ system. Your essay should employ
either footnotes or endnotes for its references. The difference between the two is
simply one of where the references appear. Footnotes are placed at the bottom of the
page to which they refer. Endnotes are collected on a separate page at the end of the
essay, titled ‘Endnotes’ (not ‘References’ or ‘Citations’ or anything else!).
1.2
Footnotes or endnotes should be indicated by a superscript number placed at the
relevant point in the essay. Notes should be numbered consecutively throughout your
essay, starting from 1 and should go at the end of the sentence and after the final
punctuation—like this.27
It is not good practice to have two citation marks immediately next to each
other—like this.21 22 Instead, it is fine to group several references in a single footnote
or endnote, if they combine to support the assertion being made in the essay text.
These references should be separated by semi-colons.
1.3
All the information in references should be given exactly as it appears in the
original source: for example, the names of authors and the titles of books should be
given exactly as they appear on each book’s title page. If you have consecutive
references from the same work, you may replace the second and subsequent
consecutive references with the Latin abbreviation ‘Ibid.’ (which means ‘in the same
place’). For example:
1.4
1
Linda Colley, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707-1837 (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1992), p. 100.
2
Ibid., p. 102.
However, it is worth noting that the use of ‘Ibid.’ is going out of fashion in current
historical practice. Thus, the guide below suggests that you employ the more
commonly used system, which is to give a shorted version of the author’s name and
the title of the source for all references after the first one.
28
2. What to footnote?
References are always required for: direct quotations; statistical data including
tables and charts; specific facts that are not commonly known. If you are quoting or
providing primary source material in your essay which you located in a secondary
source, then you need to state both where it came from originally (the primary source)
and where you found it (the secondary source).
2.1
Generally known or accepted factual material does not require a reference to
support it, even if you obtained it from a particular source in print. This includes
common understandings, widely shared ideas, dates, names, places and events in
history. Thus, you do not need a reference to support statements such as that
witchcraft has been a controversial subject over the years, that the Bastille was
stormed on 14 July 1789, that Karl Marx believed in class struggle or that the
President of the United States during the Cuban missile crisis was John F. Kennedy.
2.2
Information that cannot be expected to be taken on trust requires a reference.
For example, the statement that ‘The number of those who took part in the siege of the
Bastille has been estimated at 800–900 people’ would require a reference to support
it. Controversial or debatable opinions must also have a reference, such as the
assertion that: ‘It was Kennedy’s triumph over Nixon in the television debate that won
him the Presidency in 1960.’
2.3
References should be used to indicate where you have either paraphrased,
summarised or referred to an argument advanced, or an attitude adopted by, one of the
historians or other sources whose works you are using. Again, you need to use your
judgement here. ‘Karl Marx originated the concept of class warfare’ does not require
a reference. However, ‘Karl Marx argued that the French Revolution showed all the
signs of a bourgeois revolution, which he considered a key stage in his view of history
driven by class warfare’ does require a reference.
2.4
References may also be used to make incidental comments or to amplify a
point in the text. However, it is considered bad style to do this too often, so consider
carefully whether the information in your reference is really important enough to
include at all, or indeed whether it is so important that it ought to be in the main body
of the essay instead.
2.5
It is worth noting that even the most eminent historians differ in how
extensively they reference their work. For example, Zara Steiner in The Lights that
Failed (a massive, 800-page survey of European history between 1919 and 1933)
provides footnotes only for direct quotations and for statistical data—a decision she
made to avoid overburdening the book with references. Gerhard Weinberg, on the
other hand, in A World at Arms (an equally massive, 900-page history of the Second
World War) gives extensive and detailed endnotes that identify quotations and data
but also provide detailed discussions of the historiographical debates and the
secondary literature—a decision he made to situate his arguments within the fierce
debates that rage around so many questions about the war.
2.6
29
3. Books
Basic format
Books are the most common sources used by history students in their essays.
The basic format for all references to books is essentially the same, with minor
variations depending upon the number of authors, the book’s edition, and so on. The
first reference to a book should include the following information, in this form and
order:
3.1
author’s first name and last name, title of book (place of publication: publisher,
date of publication), precise page or pages consulted.
The second and all subsequent references to the book should be a shortened version of
the above:
author’s last name, short form of title of book, precise page or pages consulted.
Books by a single author
The most frequent sort of books consulted by history students will have a single
author. Here are some examples of first and second references for books by a single
author:
3.2
1
Zara Steiner, The Lights That Failed: European International History, 19191933 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 600.
2
Steiner, Lights That Failed, pp. 798-799.
3
Anne Applebaum, Gulag: A History (New York: Anchor Books, 2003), pp.
183-184.
4
Applebaum, Gulag, pp. 582-583.
Books by more than one author
Books sometimes are written by more than one author. In this case, you should
list all the authors in the order that their names appear on the book’s title page. If there
are more than two authors, you may use a shortened format which gives only the
name of the lead author followed by the Latin abbreviation et al. (meaning ‘and
others’).
3.3
Here are some examples of first and later references to books with multiple authors,
including the two different ways of listing a book with three authors:
5
Williamson Murray and Allan R. Millett, A War to be Won: Fighting the
Second World War (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), pp.
vii-ix.
6
Murray and Millett, War to be Won, p. 237.
30
7
Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt and Margaret Jacob, Telling the Truth About
History (New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1994), pp. 271-272.
8
Appleby, Hunt and Jacob, Telling the Truth, p. 306.
or
7
Joyce Appleby, et al., Telling the Truth About History (New York and London:
W.W. Norton, 1994), pp. 271-272.
8
Appleby, et al., Telling the Truth, p. 306
Books edited by one or more editors
Books are sometimes listed as having an editor—this is the case in collections of
original documents or books that are made up of essays by many different authors.
Simply insert ‘(ed.)’ after the editor’s name, or ‘(eds.)’ if there are multiple editors,
and then give the rest of the reference as normal:
3.4
9
Joachim Remak (ed.), The Nazi Years: A Documentary History (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1969), pp. 24, 37.
10
Remak (ed.), Nazi Years, p. 110.
11
Robert Boyce and Joseph A. Maiolo (eds.), The Origins of World War Two:
The Debate Continues (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), p. 1.
12
Boyce and Maiolo (eds.), Origins of World War Two, p. 2.
Books in later editions, as volumes in a series, or translated
Books sometimes have other information that should be included in references,
such as the edition (other than the first edition), the volume number (if it is part of a
series), or the name of a translator. The first reference to the book needs to contain the
full information, but need not include it on subsequent short-form references.
3.5
For a book’s edition, specify which edition it is (‘2nd edn.’, ‘3rd edn.’, ‘revised edn.’,
‘paperback edn.’, etc.) after the book’s title:
13
Ian Kershaw, The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of
Interpretation, 3rd edn. (London: Edward Arnold, 1993), pp. 59, 68-69.
14
Kershaw, Nazi Dictatorship, p. vii.
For a book’s volume title and number, give the volume number and title if the volume
has its own title. If a book is part of a series where all the volumes have the same title,
then specify the volume number only, after the publication information:
15
Theodore Zeldin, France, 1848-1945. Vol. I: Ambition, Love and Politics
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), p. 600.
16
Zeldin, France, vol. I, p. 11.
17
Sir Llewellyn Woodward, British Foreign Policy in the Second World War, 5
vols. (London: HMSO, 1971), vol. III, pp. 51-56.
18
Woodward, British Foreign Policy, vol. III, p. 499.
31
For a book’s translator, give the name of the translator after the book’s title:
19
Eberhard Kolb, The Weimar Republic, trans. P.S. Falla (London and New
York: Routledge, 1988), pp. 194-195.
20
Kolb, Weimar Republic, p. 174.
Further examples
Finally, here are some examples of references for books which contain a
combination of the above items. You will notice that, despite the addition of extra
items of information, they all still follow the same basic format.
3.6
Book with multiple authors and edition information:
21
R.R. Palmer and Joel Colton, A History of the Modern World since 1815, 6th
edn. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984), p. 712.
22
Palmer and Colton, History of the Modern World, p. 733.
Book with multiple authors, edition information, and name of translator:
23
Philippe Bernard and Henri Dubief, The Decline of the Third Republic, 19141938, paperback edn., trans. Anthony Forster (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1988), p. 124.
24
Bernard and Dubief, Decline of the Third Republic, p. 125.
4. Journal Articles
Basic format
Journal articles are another common source used by history students in their
essays. The first reference to an article in a journal should include the following
information, in this form and order:
4.1
author’s first and last name, ‘title of article’, title of journal, volume number,
issue number (date of publication), precise page or pages consulted.
The second and all subsequent references to the article should be a shortened version
of the above:
author’s last name, ‘short form of title of article’, precise page or pages
consulted.
Journal articles by a single author
Here are some examples of first and second references for journal articles by a
single author:
4.2
32
David G. Herrmann, ‘The paralysis of Italian strategy in the Italian-Turkish
War, 1911-1912’, English Historical Review, vol. CIV, no. 411 (April
1989), p. 332.
26
Herrmann, ‘Italian strategy’, p. 340.
25
Monique Clague, ‘Vision and myopia in the new politics of André Tardieu’,
French Historical Studies, vol. 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973), p. 107.
28
Clague, ‘Vision and myopia’, p. 109.
27
Journal articles by more than one author
For journal articles with more than one author, follow the same basic rules as
with books that have multiple authors. List all the authors in the order that their names
appear on the article. As with books, if there are more than two authors you may use a
shortened format which gives only the name of the lead author followed by the Latin
abbreviation et al. (meaning ‘and others’).
4.3
G.G. Jones and R.C.B. Trebilcock, ‘Russian industry and British business,
1910-1930: Oil and armaments’, Journal of European Economic History,
vol. 11 (1982), p. 61.
30
Jones and Trebilcock, ‘Russian industry and British business’, p. 62.
29
Article in a newspaper
For most references to basic news reports in newspapers, you need only to give
the headline, the name of the paper, the date, the section name (if appropriate) and the
page number. However, where it is specifically listed and especially if it is significant
to the content of your reference, such as with editorial or opinion pieces, you should
give the author’s name and the title of the article.
4.4
35
36
‘Interest rates to remain on hold’, The Age, 5 May 2005, p. 1
‘Interest rates to remain on hold’.
Kevin Rudd, ‘Labour’s industrial relations formula’, The Australian, 18 April
2007, p. 17.
38
Rudd, ‘Labour’s industrial relations formula’.
37
Book reviews
Books reviews generally appear as articles in scholarly journals and newspapers.
The reference should refer primarily to the author of the review, not to the author of
the book being reviewed.
4.5
1
Heather Coleman, review of Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism. Ordinary
Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999), in Canadian Journal of History, vol. 36
(2001), pp. 151-152.
2
Coleman, review of Everyday Stalinism, p. 151.
33
5. Book Chapters and Documentary Collections
Individual chapters in edited books/anthologies
Anthologies of essays containing a number of chapters written by different
authors are another common source for history students. You should cite the specific
chapter that you have consulted, providing the author’s name and the title of the
chapter, plus the editor’s name and the title of the book.
5.1
author’s first and last name, ‘title of chapter’, in editor’s first and last name, title
of book (place of publication: publisher, date of publication), precise page
or pages consulted.
The second and all subsequent references to the chapter are shortened versions:
author’s last name, ‘short form of title of chapter’, precise page or pages
consulted.
Here are some examples of first and second references for book chapters by a single
author:
David Reynolds, ‘Churchill and De Gaulle: Makers and writers of history’, in
Antoine Capet (ed.), Britain, France and the Entente Cordiale since 1904
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), p. 120.
32
Reynolds, ‘Churchill and De Gaulle’, pp. 117-118.
31
Condoleeza Rice, ‘The making of Soviet strategy’, in Peter Paret (ed.),
Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), pp. 648-653.
34
Rice, ‘Soviet strategy’, p. 658.
33
Documents from a documentary collection
Documentary collections can be extremely useful sources for history students, as
they provide access to primary sources on a topic. If you take a direct quotation from
a specific document from within a documentary collection, you must clearly identify
both the document itself, the collection from which it comes (including the editors and
the title), and its place within that collection (such as its document number).
5.2
35
Henderson to Newton (telegram), 29 June 1931, in E.L. Woodward and R.
Butler (eds.), Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919-1939, Second
Series, vol. II: 1931 (London: HMSO, 1947), no. 93.
36
Henderson to Newton, 29 June 1931.
‘Directive for Operation White’, 11 April 1939, in J. Noakes and G. Pridham
(eds.), Nazism, 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader. Vol. 3: Foreign
Policy, War and Racial Extermination (Exeter: University of Exeter Press,
1988), no. 538.
38
‘Directive for Operation White’, 11 April 1939.
37
34
Items from Unit Readers
As a rule, you should not include citations from your unit’s study guide or
from your lecture notes. You may include references from the readings collected in
your Unit Reader, but you should cite the original source of the reading in question as
well as the fact that you consulted it as a reprint in the reader.
5.3
1
Arther Ferrill, The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation
(London: Thames and Hudson, 1988), p. 21, reprinted in HIS 182: Turning
Points in History, Internal and External Unit Reader (Perth: Murdoch
University, 2006).
2
Ferrill, Roman Empire, p. 19.
6. Internet Sites and Oral/Audiovisual Sources
Internet sites are becoming an increasingly popular source for students
conducting research on historical topics. While such sites should be used with extreme
caution, there are some areas (such as access to primary sources) where they can be
very useful. You should in all cases provide a reference for the exact web address and
the date on which you accessed it. If possible, you should give the author’s name, the
title of site, and the date the web page in question was created.
6.1
Here are some examples of how to cite acceptable web sources:
‘The Treaty of Versailles, 28 June 1919’, archived at The Avalon Project at
Yale Law School, [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/menu.htm],
accessed on 30 January 2007.
36
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, ‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’,
archived at the Marxists Internet Archive, [http://www.marxists.org/
archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm], accessed on
30 January 2007.
35
Oral interviews can be extremely useful for local histories and recording
personal stories. They should be referenced by the name of the subject of the
interview, followed by the name of the interviewer and the date the interview took
place, as well as the physical location of the interview recording.
6.2
40
Cathy Bates, interviewed by James Smith, 12 October 1995 (Murdoch
University Library, Perth), QB23, box 1.
Audio-visual sources such as movies or songs can be relevant and legitimate as
historical sources, especially in the context of cultural history. They are identified by
the title, the director or the artist, and any distinctive information about the source.
6.3
‘Blade Runner’, DVD, dir. Ridley Scott (Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video,
1983).
42
Bob Dylan, ‘Leopard-skin pillbox hat’, from Blonde on Blonde, Columbia
Records, released 27 June 1966.
41
35
D. Bibliographies
1. Basic rules
History essays require a bibliography. A bibliography is simply a separate page
at the end of your essay at the end of your essay—titled ‘Bibliography’, not ‘Works
Cited’, ‘References’ or anything else!—that lists all of the sources you consulted
which informed the content of your essay. All sources that appear in your footnotes
should also be listed in the bibliography, but the bibliography may also contain
additional works which do not appear in the footnotes if they were significant in your
research. However, you should never ‘pad’ your bibliography by including additional
works that you have not consulted directly or which had no real influence on your
essay.
1.1
For most undergraduate history essays, it will be usual to give all your sources
in a single list. However, if you have a very large number of sources, or wish to
highlight the different types of sources that you have consulted, you can subdivide
your bibliography into different sections. The first and most import division is
between primary and secondary sources: if you have made use of original documents
in your research these should always be listed in a separate section. Secondary sources
may be subdivided into categories such as ‘Books’, ‘Journal Articles and Book
Chapters’, ‘Internet Sites’, and so on.
1.2
Within each section of your bibliography, items must be listed in alphabetical
order by each author’s last name. When listing more than one item by the same
author, order them by their date of publication, from oldest to most recent. For second
and subsequent consecutive entries by the same author, you can replace the author’s
name with eight underlined spaces followed by a period—like this: ________.
1.3
Each entry in your bibliography should be single-spaced. The first line should
begin at the left margin, with all subsequent lines being indented. You should leave a
blank line to separate each entry in your bibliography. In bibliographies, in contrast to
footnotes/endnotes, there is no need for brackets around the publication information.
Do not number the items or list them with bullet points!
1.4
36
2. Books
Basic format
Books are the most common sources used by history students in their essays.
The basic format for listing a book in your bibliography, whether by an author or an
editor (including documentary collections), is as follows:
2.1
author’s last name, author’s first name. title of book. place of publication:
publisher, date of publication.
Books by a single author or editor
Most books will have a single author or editor. Here are some examples of
entries for books by single authors and editors, in alphabetical order as they would
appear in a bibliography and with two entries from one of the authors.
2.2
Applebaum, Anne. Gulag: A History. New York: Anchor Books, 2003.
Remak, Joachim, ed. The Nazi Years: A Documentary History. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1969.
Steiner, Zara. Britain and the Origins of the First World War. New York: St.
Martin’s Press, 1977.
________. The Lights that Failed: European International History, 1919-1933.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Books by more than one author or editor
When a book has more than one author or editor, you should list all the authors
or editors in the same order that their names appear on the book’s title page. However,
note that the first author or editor’s name should be given as ‘last name, first name’,
while all subsequent authors or editors should be given as ‘first name last name’.
2.3
Appleby, Joyce, Lynn Hunt and Margaret Jacob. Telling the Truth About
History. New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1994.
Boyce, Robert and Joseph A. Maiolo, eds. The Origins of World War Two: The
Debate Continues. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Murray, Williamson and Allan R. Millett. A War to be Won: Fighting the
Second World War. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.
Books in later editions, as volumes in a series, or translated
Books should be listed in your bibliography with as complete information as
possible, including the edition (other than the first edition), the volume number (if it is
part of a series), or the name of the translator.
2.4
37
Here are some examples of how these would be listed:
Kershaw, Ian. The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of
Interpretation. 3rd edn. London: Edward Arnold, 1993.
Kolb, Eberhard. The Weimar Republic. trans. by P.S. Falla. London and New
York: Routledge, 1988.
Woodward, Sir Llewellyn. British Foreign Policy in the Second World War.
Vol. III. London: HMSO, 1971.
Zeldin, Theodore. France, 1848-1945. Vol. I: Ambition, Love and Politics.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.
________. France, 1848-1945. Vol. II: Intellect, Taste and Anxiety. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1975.
Further examples
Finally, here are some examples of entries for books which contain a
combination of the above items. You will notice that, despite the addition of extra
items of information, they all still follow the same basic format
2.5
Bernard, Philippe and Henri Dubief. The Decline of the Third Republic, 19141938. paperback edn. trans. Anthony Forster. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1988.
Palmer, R.R. and Joel Colton. A History of the Modern World since 1815. 6th
edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984.
Documentary collections
Documentary collections can be extremely useful sources for history students, as
they provide access to primary sources on a topic. While you may have given specific
references in your footnotes to documents from within the edited collection, in your
bibliography you usually would only give the details of the book itself.
2.6
Noakes, J. and G. Pridham, eds. Nazism, 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader.
Vol. 3: Foreign Policy, War and Racial Extermination (Exeter: University
of Exeter Press, 1988).
Woodward, E.L. and R. Butler, eds. Documents on British Foreign Policy,
1919-1939, Second Series, vol. II: 1931. London: HMSO, 1947.
38
3. Journal Articles
Basic format
Journal articles are another common source used by history students in their
essays. The basic format for listing a journal article in your bibliography is as follows:
3.1
author’s last name, author’s first name. ‘title of article’. title of journal. volume
number, issue number (date of publication).
Journal articles by a single author
3.2
Here are some examples for journal articles by a single author:
Clague, Monique. ‘Vision and myopia in the new politics of André Tardieu’.
French Historical Studies. vol. 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973).
Herrmann, David G. ‘The paralysis of Italian strategy in the Italian-Turkish War,
1911-1912’. English Historical Review. vol. CIV, no. 411 (April 1989).
Journal articles by more than one author
For journal articles with more than one author, list all the authors in the order
that their names appear on the article. The first author’s name should be given as ‘last
name, first name’ but all other authors should be given as ‘first name last name’.
3.3
Jones, G.G. and R.C.B. Trebilcock. ‘Russian industry and British business,
1910-1930: Oil and armaments’. Journal of European Economic History.
vol. 11 (1982).
Newspapers
Individual items from daily papers are not usually listed separately in the
bibliography. Instead, give the name of the paper, its place of publication and the run
of dates for which it was consulted.
3.4
The Times (London), December 1931-January 1932.
The West Australian (Perth), 1999-2003.
Book reviews
Books reviews generally appear as articles in scholarly journals and newspapers.
They should be referenced in your bibliography by the author of the review, not the
author of the book being reviewed.
4.4
Coleman, Heather. Review of Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism. Ordinary
Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999). In Canadian Journal of History, vol. 36
(2001).
39
4. Book Chapters
Individual chapters in edited books/anthologies
Anthologies of essays containing a number of chapters written by different
authors are another common source for history students. You should give references
for the specific chapter that you have consulted, providing the author’s name and the
title of the chapter as well as the editor’s name and the title of the book.
4.1
author’s last name, author’s first name. ‘title of chapter’. In editor’s first and last
name. title of book. place of publication: publisher, date of publication.
Here are some examples of first and second references for book chapters by a single
author:
Reynolds, David. ‘Churchill and De Gaulle: Makers and writers of history’. In
Antoine Capet, ed. Britain, France and the Entente Cordiale since 1904.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
Rice, Condoleeza. ‘The making of Soviet strategy’. In Peter Paret, ed. Makers of
Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1986.
5. Internet Sites and Oral/Audiovisual Sources
Internet sites are becoming an increasingly popular source for students
conducting research on historical topics. While such sites should be used with extreme
caution, there are some areas (such as access to primary sources) where they can be
very useful. You should in all cases provide a reference for the exact web address and
the date on which you accessed it. Note that for some on-line databases and reference
sites, there is often a note on ‘how to cite this entry’ at the end of the article.
5.1
Here are some examples of how to cite acceptable web sources:
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. ‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’. Archived
at the Marxists Internet Archive. [http://www.marxists.org/archive
/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm]. Accessed on 30
January 2007.
‘The Treaty of Versailles, 28 June 1919’. Archived at The Avalon Project at
Yale Law School. [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/menu.htm].
Accessed on 30 January 2007.
Oral interviews should be referenced by the name of the subject of the interview,
followed by the name of the interviewer and the date the interview took place, as well
as the physical location of the interview recording.
5.2
40
Bates, Cathy. Interview by James Smith, 12 October 1995 (Murdoch University
Library, Perth), QB23, box 1.
Audio-visual sources such as movies are identified by the title, the director, and
distinctive information about the print or cut of the source. For musical sources, the
bibliography usually lists the title of the relevant album rather than individual songs.
5.3
‘Blade Runner’. DVD. Dir. Ridley Scott. Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video,
1983.
Bob Dylan, Blonde on Blonde, Columbia Records, released 27 June 1966.
41
Appendix 1. Reference Guide Summary
Footnote/Endnote (N) and Bibliography (B)
BOOK WITH SINGLE AUTHOR
N
Zara Steiner, The Lights That Failed: European International History, 19191933 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 600.
B
Steiner, Zara. The Lights that Failed: European International History, 19191933. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
BOOK WITH MULTIPLE AUTHORS
N
Williamson Murray and Allan R. Millett, A War to be Won: Fighting the Second
World War (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), pp. v-vi.
B
Murray, Williamson and Allan R. Millett. A War to be Won: Fighting the
Second World War. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.
EDITED BOOK WITH ONE EDITOR
N
Joachim Remak (ed.), The Nazi Years: A Documentary History (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1969), pp. 24, 37.
B
Remak, Joachim, ed. The Nazi Years: A Documentary History. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1969.
EDITED BOOK WITH MULTIPLE EDITORS
N
Robert Boyce and Joseph A. Maiolo (eds.), The Origins of World War Two: The
Debate Continues (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), p. 1.
B
Boyce, Robert and Joseph A. Maiolo, eds. The Origins of World War Two: The
Debate Continues. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
LATER EDITION OF BOOK
N
Ian Kershaw, The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation, 3rd edn. (London: Edward Arnold, 1993), pp. 59, 68-69.
B
Kershaw, Ian. The Nazi Dictatorship: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretation. 3rd edn. London: Edward Arnold, 1993.
VOLUME IN A SERIES
N
Sir Llewellyn Woodward, British Foreign Policy in the Second World War, 5
vols. (London: HMSO, 1971), vol. III, pp. 51-56.
B
Woodward, Sir Llewellyn. British Foreign Policy in the Second World War.
Vol. III. London: HMSO, 1971.
TRANSLATED BOOK
N
Eberhard Kolb, The Weimar Republic, trans. P.S. Falla (London and New York:
Routledge, 1988), pp. 194-195.
B
Kolb, Eberhard. The Weimar Republic. trans. by P.S. Falla. London and New
York: Routledge, 1988.
42
JOURNAL ARTICLE
N
Monique Clague, ‘Vision and myopia in the new politics of André Tardieu’,
French Historical Studies, vol. 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973), p. 107.
B
Clague, Monique. ‘Vision and myopia in the new politics of André Tardieu’.
French Historical Studies. vol. 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973).
JOURNAL ARTICLE WITH MULTIPLE AUTHORS
N
G.G. Jones and R.C.B. Trebilcock, ‘Russian industry and British business, 19101930: Oil and armaments’, Journal of European Economic History, vol. 11
(1982), p. 61.
B
Jones, G.G. and R.C.B. Trebilcock. ‘Russian industry and British business,
1910-1930: Oil and armaments’. Journal of European Economic History.
vol. 11 (1982).
CHAPTER WITHIN A BOOK
N
David Reynolds, ‘Churchill and De Gaulle: Makers and writers of history’, in
Antoine Capet (ed.), Britain, France and the Entente Cordiale since 1904
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), p. 120.
B
Reynolds, David. ‘Churchill and De Gaulle: Makers and writers of history’. In
Antoine Capet, ed. Britain, France and the Entente Cordiale since 1904.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
DOCUMENTARY COLLECTION
N
‘Directive for Operation White’, 11 April 1939, in J. Noakes and G. Pridham
(eds.), Nazism, 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader. Vol. 3: Foreign Policy, War
and Racial Extermination (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1988), no. 538.
B
Noakes, J. and G. Pridham, eds. Nazism, 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader.
Vol. 3: Foreign Policy, War and Racial Extermination (Exeter: University
of Exeter Press, 1988).
BOOK REVIEW
N
Heather Coleman, review of Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism. Ordinary
Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1999), in Canadian Journal of History, vol. 36 (2001), pp.
151-152.
B
Coleman, Heather. Review of Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism. Ordinary
Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999. In Canadian Journal of History, vol. 36
(2001).
NEWSPAPER ARTICLE
N
‘Interest rates to remain on hold’, The Age, 5 May 2005, p. 1
B
The Age, February-August 2005.
43
ITEM IN UNIT READER
N
Arther Ferrill, The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation
(London: Thames and Hudson, 1988), p. 21, reprinted in HIS 182: Turning
Points in History, Internal and External Unit Reader (Perth: Murdoch
University, 2006).
B
Ferrill, Arther. The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation.
London: Thames and Hudson, 1988. Reprinted in HIS 182: Turning Points
in History, Internal and External Unit Reader. Perth: Murdoch University,
2006.
UNPUBLISHED THESIS
N
Gregory W. Brotherson, ‘John Horne Tooke (1736-1812): revolutionary &
libeller’, (PhD dissertation, Murdoch University, 1999), p. 100.
B
Brotherson, Gregory W. ‘John Horne Tooke (1736-1812): revolutionary &
libeller’. PhD dissertation. Murdoch University (1999).
INTERNET ARTICLE
N
Kenneth Macksey, ‘Blitzkrieg’, in I. C. B. Dear and M. R. D. Foot, (eds.), The
Oxford Companion to World War II (Oxford University Press, 2001), archived
at Oxford Reference Online, [http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.
html?subview=Main&entry=t129.e207], accessed 31 January 2007.
B
Macksey, Kenneth. ‘Blitzkrieg’. In I. C. B. Dear and M. R. D. Foot, eds. The
Oxford Companion to World War II. Oxford University Press, 2001.
Archived at Oxford Reference Online. [http://www.oxfordreference.com/
views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t129.e207]. Accessed 31
January 2007.
INTERNET DOCUMENT
N
‘The Treaty of Versailles, 28 June 1919’, archived at The Avalon Project at Yale
Law School, [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/menu.htm], accessed on
30 January 2007.
B
‘The Treaty of Versailles, 28 June 1919’. Archived at The Avalon Project at
Yale Law School. [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/menu.htm].
Accessed on 30 January 2007.
AUDIO-VISUAL SOURCES
N
‘Blade Runner’, DVD, dir. Ridley Scott (Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video,
1983).
B
‘Blade Runner’. DVD. Dir. Ridley Scott. Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video,
1983.
ORAL HISTORIES/INTERVIEWS
N
Cathy Bates, interviewed by James Smith, 12 October 1995 (Murdoch
University Library, Perth), QB23, box 1.
B
Bates, Cathy. Interview by James Smith, 12 October 1995 (Murdoch University
Library, Perth), QB23, box 1.
44
COMMON ABBREVIATIONS
p.
single page
pp.
multiple pages
ed.
single editor
eds.
multiple editors
vol.
single volume
vols.
multiple volumes
edn.
edition
trans.
translator
Ibid.
for consecutive references to the same work
n.d.
no date (if the work lists no date of publication)
n.p.
no place or no publisher (if the work does not list these publication
details)
sic
should be inserted in square brackets following a word or expression
that is misspelled or wrongly used in the original source (means ‘so’,
‘in this manner’)
45
APPENDIX 2: Sample ‘mini-essay’ with footnotes and commentary
The question of where to assign responsibility for the rise to power of Adolf Hitler has generated
historical debate since the very moment of his appointment as Chancellor on 30 January 1933. There is, for
instance, a long history of placing blame on Britain and France, the former allied powers, for their mishandling of relations with Weimar Germany during the 1920s and early 1930s.1 Richard Lamb has argued that
Britain ‘refused [concessions] to democratic German governments before January 1933, when they could
have been a potent factor in keeping the Nazis out of power’.2 On the other side of the Channel, according to
Anthony Adamthwaite, French leaders gave in to fear and indecision as ‘the conservative, unimaginative,
overcautious outlook of political and military chiefs blocked concessions’.3 He shows also the lack of military
preparedness as military spending in France fell from 15.1 billion francs in 1930 to 10.4 billion francs in 1935,
while for Germany it rose from under one billion RM in 1930 to 6.1 billion RM in 1935.4 The real problem
was that Britain and France never seemed to be able to work together: even as France was collapsing before
the German invasion in May 1940, one British official could rather smugly note in his diary:
[T]hey are in a fix—quite helpless and no stomach for the fight. I think we’d be
better [off] without them. If we keep them in the fight, we’ve got to give them air
protection and drain away our defences… Better said [sic], ‘All right: if you can’t
stick it out, get out or give in: We go on alone.’ 5
Yet some of key aspects of the impact of Anglo-French relations on Hitler’s rise to power remain unexplored
in any depth by historians.6 Though some historians have felt the two powers to be inevitably defined by their
differences, a recent study argues more persuasively that their ‘long separation’ is by no means a permanent or
inevitable state of affairs.7 In the end, perhaps, the fundamental problem was put most succinctly by the
former British Foreign Secretary, Sir Austen Chamberlain, when he wrote in 1935 that ‘No two countries
have a greater need to understand one another than England and France; and yet no two peoples find
national understanding more difficult.’8
___________________
See, for instance: Richard Lamb, The Drift to War, 1922-1939 (paperback edn., London: Bloomsbury, 1991);
John Cairns, ‘A nation of shopkeepers in search of a suitable France, 1919-1940’, American Historical Review,
vol. 79, no. 3 (June 1974); and Alan Sharp, ‘Anglo-French relations from Versailles to Locarno, 1919-1925:
The quest for security’, in A. Sharp and G. Stone (eds.), Anglo-French Relations in the Twentieth Century: Rivalry
and Cooperation (London and New York: Routledge, 2000).
1
2
Lamb, Drift to War, p. 89.
Anthony Adamthwaite, Grandeur and Misery: France’s Bid for Power in Europe, 1914-1940 (London: Arnold,
1995), p. 228.
3
4
Ibid., p. 145.
Diary entry, 31 May 1940, in David Dilks (ed.), The Diaries of Sir Alexander Cadogan, 1938-1945 (London:
Cassell, 1971), p. 293 (emphasis in original).
5
There are, for instance, no significant studies of the reception of Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, in British and
French political circles and how this might have affected policy-making.
6
7
See P.M.H. Bell, France and Britain, 1940-1994: The Long Separation (London: Longman, 1997), p. 7.
Austen Chamberlain, Down the Years (London: Cassell, 1935), quoted in Sharp, ‘Anglo-French relations’, p.
134.
8
46
Commentary
While historically accurate, this sample essay is obviously heavily contrived:
you would not normally expect to have such a density of references (eight footnotes in
a single paragraph), yet it would be a rare paragraph in an essay that would not require
at least one citation of a source.
Notice that the first sentence does not have a reference. Generally known or
accepted factual material does not require a citation to support it. Thus, you do not
need a source to demonstrate that Hitler is a controversial historical figure, or that he
came to power on 30 January 1933.
Note 1: This is a ‘bibliographical note’ referring to a body of literature on a
certain topic. Notes of this sort are used to support statements in essays such as ‘there
has been an increasing amount of interest in’ or ‘some historians have argued that’.
This note contains examples of the proper formats for three major types of source: a
book, a journal article, and a contribution to an edited collection. You can see here
that, when citing more than one source in a note, you should separate them with semicolons. Because it is the general argument of these three works that is being
referenced here, there is no need for specific page numbers.
Note 2: Quotations must always have a specific reference, including an exact
page number, to identify precisely where the quote comes from. This note shows how
to refer to a work that has already been mentioned in a previous note—by using only
the author’s last name, a shortened version of the title and the correct page reference.
Notes 3 and 4: Here a new source is introduced, first to provide a quotation and
then to provide some statistical data. As with quotations, statistics and exact figures
must always have a specific reference, including an exact page number, to show
precisely where this information was obtained. Notice that while the abbreviation
‘Ibid.’ is used in Note 4, as it is a consecutive reference to the same source (the book
by Adamthwaite), a shortened-form reference could also have been employed.
Note 5: This note is attached to a longer, ‘block’ quotation in the text. You can
see that the quotation is single-spaced, indented and does not use quotation marks
except for the ‘quote within the quote’ at the end. The quotation itself comes from a
primary source, the diary of Sir Alexander Cadogan, a diplomat from the time, which
has since been published. The footnote also identifies that the underlining in the
quotation is in the original source.
Note 6: Notes can sometimes be used to provide additional information or to
develop a point that is worth mentioning but is too tangential to be included in the
main body of the essay. Be sparing on this, however: the vast majority of such
information is either so peripheral that it should be omitted entirely or is important
enough that it ought to go in the main body of the essay.
Note 7: This note shows how one might paraphrase an author’s statement of
their argument.
Note 8: This note shows how to reference material that was itself cited in
another of your sources. In this case, it would be an incomplete note that merely cited
Sharp’s article, but it would be dishonest to cite only Chamberlain’s book if you had
not yourself consulted this source in the original. You should never cite as your source
any document, book or article unless you have read it yourself.
47
Appendix 3. Sample Bibliography
Primary Sources
‘Agreement concluded at Munich, September 29, 1938, between Germany, Great
Britain, France and Italy’. Archived at the Avalon Project at Yale Law School.
Web page created 1997. [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/document/
munich1.htm]. Accessed on 31 January 2007.
The Diaries of Victor Klemperer, 1933-1945: I Shall Bear Witness to the Bitter End.
Ed. and trans. Martin Chalmers. Paperback edn. London: Phoenix Press, 2000.
Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919-1939. Second Series. Volume IV: 19321933. Eds. E.L. Woodward and R. Butler. London: His Majesty’s Stationery
Office, 1950.
The Times (London): September-October 1938; September 1939.
Secondary Sources
Bell, P.M.H. The Origins of the Second World War in Europe. 2nd edn. London and
New York: Longman, 1997.
________. ‘Peace movements’. In Robert Boyce and Joseph A. Maiolo, eds. The
Origins of World War Two: The Debate Continues. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2003.
Boyce, Robert and Joseph A. Maiolo, eds. The Origins of World War Two: The
Debate Continues. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003
Burleigh, Michael and Wolfgang Wippermann. The Racial State: Germany, 19331945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Jackson, Peter. ‘French intelligence and Hitler’s rise to power’. Historical Journal.
vol. 41, no. 3 (September 1998).
________. France and the Nazi Menace: Intelligence and Policy Making, 1933-1939.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Magee, Francis D. ‘The British government, the last Weimar governments and the rise
of Hitler, 1929-1933’. PhD thesis. University of Leeds, 1992.
Taylor, Telford. Munich: The Price of Peace. New York: Vintage Books, 1980.
48
Appendix 4. Further Resources
Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors and Publishers.
15th edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. [808.0270973 CHI 2003]
Marius, Richard, and Melvin E. Page. A Short Guide to Writing About History. 4th
edn. New York: Longman, 2002.
Rampolla, Mary Lynn. A Pocket Guide to Writing in History. 4th edn. Boston:
Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004.
Storey, William K. Writing History: A Guide for Students. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1st edn. 1999, 2nd edn. 2004. [907.2 STO 1999/2004]
Turabian, Kate L. A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses and Dissertations. 6th
edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. [808.02 TUR 1996]
Walker, Janice R. and Todd Taylor, The Columbia Guide to Online Style. (Columbia
University Press, 2006: www.columbia.edu/cu/cup/cgos2006/basic.html
49