Surviving Master's-Level History Programs at Norwich University: A ...

AcknowledgmentsThis document was written to help provide prospectivestudents as well as existing students some clear guidance onprogram goals, expectations and standards as well as adviceon PhD programs and the problems of history. AssociateProgram Director John “Doc” Broom, Capstone DirectorProfessor John Grenier and Professor John Votaw allreviewed and commented on earlier drafts.Their ideas, comments and editing substantially improvedthis document and I owe them my thanks and gratitude fortheir contributions not only to this “Survival Guide,” but fortheir continuing service to the Master of Arts in MilitaryHistory program, Master of Arts in History program andNorwich University.1

Program GoalsWelcome to the Norwich University College ofGraduate and Continuing Studies MA in historyprograms! We hope you are looking forward to thechallenge that lies before you. The history graduatefaculty and I have created the Survival Guide to helpyou succeed in this program and to provide a usefulreference regarding program goals, expectations, andstandards.All of you have entered the program with goals in mind.Some may use the degree as a springboard to a historyPhD program, while our active duty military personnel mayuse their MA to increase their chances for promotion andto develop their skills as leaders and strategic thinkers.Many secondary school teachers, or those who wish toteach at the community college level, enter the programto gain subject matter expertise in the field of history.Our program also has many students who simply wish tolearn more about a subject that fascinates them. Whateveryour motivations are, let’s begin the program by clearlyarticulating its academic goals.The Norwich University MA in Military History andMA in History curriculum is guided by the AmericanHistorical Association’s (AHA) “five elements ofmastery” for students enrolled in a history MAprograms. In a MA History program students areexpected to gain:• A base of historical knowledge• Research and presentation skills• An introduction to historical pedagogy• The foundations for a professional identity asa historian• The skills to think like a historian2

Many of you may find the AHA “five elements of mastery”vague. You are not alone. Many traditional MA programsstudied by the AHA, as well as graduate school facultyinterviewed by the AHA, had difficulty defining thestandards, goals, and expectations for students in MAhistory programs. Much of the problem is rooted in themistaken notion that a MA degree is useful only as agateway to a history PhD program. In the most extremecases, some graduate faculty members view the MA as aconsolation prize for those unwilling or unable to do workat the PhD level. This perception of the MA degree hasconditioned the perceptions of graduate faculty membersfor years and is sadly outdated and out of touch withcurrent realities. Norwich University believes the MA inhistory has merit as a student’s terminal degree. Indeed,most students who enter traditional, residential MAprograms have no desire to go on to a PhD. Instead thevast majority of MA students see the degree as a gatewayto teaching positions in secondary schools or communitycolleges, public history positions in museums or archives,publishing, or, for those in the armed forces, a means togain professional development and obtain a promotion.Our goal is to provide you with an intellectually rigorous,advanced education in the historical arts.As you commence your work in the Norwich Universitygraduate history program, keep the “five elements ofmastery” in mind as your primary objectives. I haveoutlined in more detail what each of these five elementsmean in our MA programs:1. A base of historical knowledge. The Norwichhistory graduate programs seek to matriculate“educated history generalists” who have both a breadthand depth of historical knowledge. This knowledgeshould permit you to analyze and synthesize a broadrange of historical materials into a coherent whole.All of our seminars cover vast areas of history. Weencourage you to read beyond the assigned texts,critically evaluate all historical interpretations, andprepare yourself for the continued study of history longafter you have finished your program of study.In the course of this program, we want studentsto be aware that historians interpret the past inmany different ways and that all areas of the field ofhistory are open to debate and different historicalinterpretations. The body of past and currentinterpretations is referred as historiography. History isnot a dead or static field and our understanding andinterpretation of the past is constantly changing andevolving. Historians can come to startlingly differentconclusions about an event even when they use thesame body of evidence. Simply put, history is anunending debate about the meaning of our past.2. Research and presentation skills. Many of theseminars in this program require end-of-seminar researchpapers or historiographic essays. Your capstone paper orthesis will be the longest and most challenging researchproject you undertake. You should learn to distinguishbetween scholarly and popular sources, critically evaluatesecondary and primary sources, master the library’scomputer databases, and use traditional research aidessuch as specialized military history bibliographies andresearch guides.Writing skills will also be honed and developed duringyour time in this program. Historians debate the meaningof historical events via articles and books. Writing clearlyand concisely is a critical and fundamental skill. Propergrammar, proper Chicago Manual of Style footnotes andbibliographies, the use of credible sources, and high levelanalysis are essential elements of a graduate-level paper inhistory. You are also strongly encouraged to use the spelland grammar check capabilities of their word processingsoftware and have a classmate—a “peer reviewer”—proofread your written work prior to submitting it to theirinstructor. Having a peer reviewer read your work willhelp eliminate grammatical errors and improve its clarity.1American Historical Association, Committee on the Master’s Degree in History, Retrieving the Master’s Degree from the Dustbin of History:A Report to the Members of the American Historical Association, (American Historical Association, 2005), 41-44.3

It is never too early to begin thinking about your capstonepaper. The capstone is an original research paper ofapproximately 45-50 pages due at the end of Seminar 6.We encourage students, if possible, to use primary sourceand archival materials for this project. While travel tothe National Archives, Center for Military History andLibrary of Congress in Washington, DC might not bepossible, state and local historical societies and archivesare often overlooked resources. I encourage you to visitthem and speak to the archivists about their holdings.You might be pleasantly surprised at what is available inyour locality. Many archives are also digitizing substantialamounts of primary source documents and posting themon their websites. It is possible to obtain large amountsof primary source documents online if you know whereto look. I encourage all graduate students to attend theinformation literacy sessions hosted by the Norwichreference librarians.Students may petition the Program Director to undertakea traditional MA thesis. This degree completion projectrequires letters of recommendation and support fromNorwich graduate faculty, an approved research questionand extensive use of primary source materials. Dependingon the nature of the topic, the thesis may also requirereading competency in a foreign language. Given thedemands of the thesis option, additional time is allowedto complete this project. Those approved for a thesis willhave an extended period of enrollment in the programand should not expect to graduate earlier than 24 monthsfrom the beginning of their graduate studies.3. An introduction to historical pedagogy. One of thegoals of the program that is closely related to developinga broad and deep base of historical knowledge, andthe ability to analyze and synthesize, is to learn how toimpart that information to senior high school and collegestudents as well as the general public. Students who areprofessional educators and do not plan on pursuinga PhD in history may want to consider (with yourinstructors permission) developing military history syllabiand course lectures in lieu of an end-of-seminar paper.Student projects might also be aimed at “public history”or how to interpret military history for the general public.State and local historical societies and museums mightprovide excellent opportunities for those interested in thefield of public history.An understanding of the historiography of a topic isan essential element in teaching at the college leveland a vital part of being a professional historian. Anunderstanding of the various issues and interpretationsof a particular topic or historical era will help youimpart an appreciation of the past.4. Building the foundation for a professional identityas a history. This foundation includes knowledge ofthe development of the field of history, including itsethical standards and practices. Historians must alwaysbe open and honest about the sources they use in theirwriting, carefully document all of the information theyuse, and avoid plagiarism at all costs. Part of being aprofessional historian involves collaboration with otherhistorians, and accepting the critical feedback otherhistorians may provide about your work. Criticismoften emerges when discussing historical problemsand research with one another, informing others ofuseful source material, and reviewing and proofreadingdrafts of papers. We encourage students to solicit thefeedback of their classmates on seminar projects. Youcan learn as much from your classmates as you canfrom your instructors. A fresh set of eyes can usuallydetect errors of grammar or logic and make a goodpaper even better. Debating with your classmates aboutyour readings as well as drafts of your papers will makeyou a better historian.5. Learning to think like a historian. This elementrequires the development of “historical habits of mind”and “historiographic sensibilities.” This means we shouldappreciate that all interpretations have their flaws andour understanding of the past evolves and changesover time. Historians also have to be aware of their ownprejudices and biases when examining history. Historiansmust have an appreciation for the enormous complexityof human events, and understand that no matter howmuch evidence we might have about an event, ourknowledge and understanding of the past is extremelylimited. Finally, historians must be prepared to argue andprovide significance for their interpretations. Professionalhistorians use the written and spoken word to provideanalysis, synthesis, argument, and significance (ASAS)regarding past events. If you are not engaging in ASAS,you are not thinking like a professional historian, butinstead a “history buff” or amateur.4

Program ObjectivesIn addition to the AHA’s “five elements of mastery,” theNorwich history graduate program faculty have alsodeveloped six program objectives. They expand uponthe AHA’s five elements to provide specific objectivesfor our unique online program in the advanced (MAlevel) study of history. The six program objectives focuson the fields of military or American history. They are:1. Demonstrate a higher level understanding of the generaltrends of historiography in general and military orAmerican historiography in particular. You will meet thisobjective through your course papers, discussions, andother projects.2. Demonstrate the ability to perform historicalresearch at the primary and secondary source levels.Your capstone paper or thesis will be the acme of yourdemonstration of this objective.3. Demonstrate the ability to provide analysis,synthesis, argument, and significance (ASAS) througheffective writing and oral presentations. Studentsmust demonstrate the ability to argue new, original,and unique points of historical and historiographicsignificance. The seminar papers, capstone paper,thesis or comprehensive examinations and seminardiscussions are the means through which you will meetthis objective.4. Demonstrate a mastery of the secondary literatureand historiography in a student-selected area ofinterest. Your capstone, thesis or comprehensiveexamination is the primary vehicle by which you willmeet this objective.5. Demonstrate a higher level understanding of theory,practice, and historiography across both time andcultures. This is a specific objective that your seminarpapers, discussions, and capstone paper will enable youto reach.6. Demonstrate a higher level understanding ofthe values and ethics that underpin the historicalprofession. Again, all your work in the program willallow you to realize this objective.5

The study of history, like the advanced study of anyfield of human inquiry, should provoke a profoundsense of humility. History is so vast and so much isunknown and unknowable about the past that it isimpossible to know it all. The Norwich military orAmerican history seminars cover vast portions ofhistory in eleven-weeks. Our goal is to develop yourskills as a historian and introduce you to the majorconcepts and interpretations within the field ofmilitary or American history. It is not possible to learneverything about a topic in just eleven weeks. The studyof history is a lifelong vocation and we hope you willcontinue to develop your knowledge and appreciationof history after you matriculate from our program. Asyou delve deeper into the study of history, it is my hopethat your love and appreciation for the field will grow.In pursuing the professional and program goalsoutlined above, it is important to note the essentials oflearning can be broken down into three components:knowledge, skills, and attitude (KSA). The mostimportant of this trinity is attitude. One can beknowledgeable, and have advanced analytical andwriting skills, however, without the proper attitude, nolearning or improvement can occur. Our instructorsare here to provide you with critical feedback on yourdiscussion postings, writing and understanding of theseminar materials. Your capstone advisor is there toprovide feedback and advice on all the componentsof your capstone paper project. Much of this will becritical feedback intended to help you improve yourknowledge and skills. Criticism is often hard to take,especially when you have spent a great deal of time andenergy on a particular project. It is important, however,to take it in the right spirit and with the right attitude.Instructors want all their students to improve theirskills throughout the program and matriculate fromthe MMH program as a skilled historian. Instructorsare there to facilitate student development and oftenthat means pointing out shortcomings or errors instudent work. Failure to hold students to NorwichMMH program standards and the standards of thehistorical profession is nothing less than educationalmal-practice. Any program that does not do this is notworth a student’s time or money.6

Beyond the MA: Thinking about a PhD?Many of our students and prospective students arecurious about PhD programs and have consideredapplying to one after matriculating from Norwich.As a Program Director, I field many questions fromstudents who wish Norwich offered a PhD in historyor military history or want additional information andrecommendations about traditional, residential PhDprograms.It should be understood that the PhD in history is notan easy undertaking and is many orders of magnitudemore difficult than a MA in history. It is generally notsomething that can be tackled while working full-time.There are currently no distance education PhD programsin history that I recommend and Norwich currentlyhas no plans to offer a PhD in history. However, we dohave a few traditional residential programs we canrecommend. The reason Norwich does not have plansto offer a PhD in history is because doctoral programsare far longer in duration than MA programs, muchmore difficult to manage and administer, have moredemanding coursework and requirements, anddemand significant library resources. There are alsostrict guidelines regarding PhD programs from theaccrediting agencies. As a result, PhD programs are besttackled by large Division I research institutions capableof supporting graduate students with graduate teachingassistantships (GTAs), research assistantships, (GRAs),dissertation fellowships and research grants.Recent studies indicate that it takes, on average, nearlyten years to earn a PhD in history. Approximately fiftypercent of all students that begin a PhD program inhistory never finish. Some programs have an evenhigher rate of attrition. The cost of a PhD can alsobe substantial. Although most PhD students receivegraduate teaching and research assistantships thatwaive tuition and offer very modest stipends, they areusually not enough to completely cover food, rent,books, insurance, and other essentials. Other sources7

of revenue are needed to cover those necessities. Atthe dissertation stage of the program, students alsomust finance travel to numerous archives in the UnitedStates or abroad. Doctoral fellowships and scholarshipsthat cover research expenses are rare and difficult toobtain. Most students in PhD programs are not fromfamilies of means or retired hedge fund managers, sothey rely on federal student loans. It is not unusual formany students to exit their commencement ceremonywith their doctoral gown and hood, PhD, and $50,000to $100,000 or more in student loan debt.PhD programs are broken down into two stages. The firststage is the coursework stage. At this stage you are referredto as a PhD student. When you start a PhD programyou are required to form a committee of 5-6 professorsand select an advisor, often referred to as your “majorprofessor” or “major advisor.” Usually the program’sDirector of Graduate Studies will assign a temporaryadvisor to you until you can select a professor you planon working with throughout your program of study. Yourselection of a major professor is usually done on the basisof the specific field you want to study and eventuallyresearch for your dissertation. Most students have a goodidea of who they wish to have as their major professorwhen they are determining what PhD program to attend.This person will have an enormous influence on yourlife and you must choose this person very carefully. Yourmajor professor will also help you select members of yourcommittee. Once a committee is formed, the student, inconsultation with the committee and major professor, willcreate and file a “program of study” document with thegraduate school. This program of study outlines, in detail,all the courses you plan on taking during the courseworkstage of your program. The program of study will alsooutline your major and minor fields. These are the fieldsyou will be tested on during your comprehensive exams.For example, if you had an interest in studying theFranco-Prussian War your major field will be modernEuropean history. Essentially all of European historyfrom 1789 to the present, not just the military history ofmodern Europe. Your minor fields will be military historyand perhaps French, German, and an outside field suchas economics or political science. There are few PhDsin military history because the PhD is most often in themajor field, e.g. American, European, or Asian history.Military history is usually a minor field and can certainlybe the topic of your dissertation if your major professorand committee support it.Committee members are also selected based on theirexpertise in specific areas germane to your program ofstudy. For example, those students who wish to studyearly modern Europe select professors with expertise inthat area to serve on their committee. Some programsrequire a portion of your coursework be in fields otherthan history, such as economics, political science,anthropology, women’s studies, a foreign language, etc.The idea behind this is to build intellectual breadthand depth to complement your research skills andgrowing expertise in a particular field. For example, ifyou wanted to specialize in Roman history your majorprofessor and committee will insist you take Latin,classics, and archaeology.Almost all PhD programs in history have a foreignlanguage requirement. The requirements vary dependingon the program and the intended field of study. Someprograms require students to demonstrate fluencyin one or two foreign languages prior to applyingfor the PhD program. Other programs may requirestudents to demonstrate proficiency in one or twoforeign languages by the end of their first year of a PhDprogram. Depending upon the field you wish to study,your committee may require you to master additionallanguages. In some instances a program may even permitstudents to fulfill the language requirement during thefirst two or three years of their program, but will notallow a student to take preliminary examinations untilthe language requirement has been met. Prospectivestudents should also take care to understand what fluencystandards will meet the program’s language requirements.Some programs insist on an advanced level of fluency inreading and speaking a foreign language. Other programsmay simply allow one to demonstrate advanced readingcomprehension skills in a foreign language. Be sure to getall the details about these requirements prior to enteringa program. The best advice, however, is to fulfill thelanguage requirement before you enter a PhD program.Doing so will permit you to maintain your focus on yourhistory coursework and reduce your level of angst.8

Your advisor will clear you to sit for the preliminaryexaminations after you have satisfied your foreignlanguage requirements and the PhD level coursework,usually ten, three-credit hour long courses in historyand your outside fields. The mere mention of theseexams will provoke fear, anxiety and dread in mostPhD students. The “prelims” are usually designed by adepartmental preliminary examination committee oryour own doctoral committee based on your major andminor fields. The written portion is administered first.Some programs allow you to take the questions homeand work on them over a period of a day or two whileother programs will only provide a couple of hours towrite out an answer to each question.Generally, these tests consist of a menu of essayquestions on the major field and each of your minorfields. You choose one or two questions from the menuand write responses that demonstrate your grasp of themajor themes of the historiography of each field, andyour ability to synthesize the information into yourown interpretation of the period. For example, if youwere an American historian you would have a singletest covering the major field of American history. Thismajor field might also include “century tests” whereyou would focus on the major themes and your owninterpretation of the colonial period, as well as thenineteenth and twentieth centuries. After completingall the written tests on the major field, your committeewill have essay questions for you on each of your minorfields.After passing the written examinations, students arepermitted to take the oral exam. Over a period of twoor three hours, the examining committee will grillyou over the answers you provided on your writtenexams. They also have the right to bring up any topic ofdiscussion they wish. This is often is a tactic designedto lead you astray. Some students attempt to engagetheir professors on all the topics that come up, evenif it is outside their area of expertise. Doing this is agrave mistake. It is far better to admit you don’t knowsomething and concede the question pertains to anarea not germane to your areas of study, rather thanto try to bluff your way through the question. Tryingto bluff your way through an oral exam will simplychallenge the committee to ask tougher and tougherquestions until you break. At its worst the oral examcan be like the Spanish Inquisition, at its best it canactually be an enjoyable debate and discussion abouthistory with the committee members. Whether theoral exam is a pleasure or a torment, depends onhow well you have prepared for the exams as wellas the character and temperament of the examiningcommittee.The way preliminary exams are administered andstructured vary from program to program, butgenerally all the written tests are taken within a one totwo-week period. The oral exam is limited to two orthree hours. If you fail your written or oral exams, someprograms allow you to retake them. There are limits tohow many times you can retake the preliminary exams.Many programs allow students to take the written andoral exams with a maximum of two times. If you failthe exams, your program of study ends and your hopesto earn a PhD come to an abrupt and bitter end. Thisis the reason why PhD students break into cold sweatswhen they think about their preliminary examinations.The stakes are very high and failure can destroy severalyears of work and sacrifice.Once the preliminary exams have been passed,students are given the status of PhD candidate ratherthan PhD student. Candidate status is also referredto as ABD (All But Dissertation). Once you reach thestage of candidacy, a clock is started that limits thetime you have to successfully complete the program.Most programs require candidates to complete theirdissertation within five years of passing the preliminaryexaminations. This may sound like a lot of time but itgoes by quickly. The period of candidacy is generallydevoted to researching and writing your dissertation.Dissertations in history are 300-400 pages in lengthand are expected to contribute something new to thefield of history. A few very well endowed programshave research fellowships to help students defray thecost of research and grant them some distraction-freetime for work on the dissertation. Unfortunately mostprograms don’t have these types of fellowships andcandidates must try to fund their research and livingexpenses with adjunct teaching positions or graduate9

teaching assistantships. As you write your dissertationyou will be handing in chapters and drafts to yourmajor professor and committee members for feedback.When the major professor believes your dissertationis nearly completed, he or she may permit you to callyour doctoral committee together for a dissertationdefense. The committee will have read your entiredissertation prior to the defense and you will beexpected to answer their questions and defend yourresearch and conclusions. In most programs there is noroom for error or mistakes in a defense. If you fail yourdissertation defense, you do not get the PhD. If yousucceed, you will have earned your PhD and the rightto be called “Doctor” or “Professor.”My intention in outlining all the details of a PhDprogram is not meant to discourage people fromapplying to PhD programs, but to give students somesense of what to expect. It is always better to havemore rather than less information regarding such animportant life decision. Getting a PhD is a seriouscommitment of time and money. It can cost tens ofthousands of dollars, create enormous amounts ofstudent loan debt, and place incredible emotionalstrain on PhD students, candidates, their spouses, andchildren. My advice to you is:6. Create a spreadsheet to map out the projected costand length of your program of study. It is advisable tomodel best, worst and intermediate scenarios. To builda relatively accurate model, research the cost of livingfor the program’s metropolitan area and ask professorsand students for information you can use to help buildan accurate financial model.7. If you are looking at a state university and are notalready a resident of that state, determine what isrequired to obtain “resident for tuition purposes” status.8. Investigate the number and availability of researchfellowships for the program’s PhD candidates.9. Talk to the program’s PhD students and candidatesregarding their experiences and solicit their opinionsabout the program.10. Prepare for PhD level work by continuing to readand learn more about your intended major and minorfields of study.1. Research PhD programs very carefully and do notrush into anything.2. Use the American Historical Association’s Guide toDepartments of History to find programs permittingspecialization in the minor field that interests you.3. Visit the campus and talk to the Department Chairor Director of Graduate Studies as well as potentialmajor professors.4. Determine the number and availability of teachingassistantships in the program.5. Understand the foreign language requirements andtry to satisfy those requirements before applying to theprogram.10

What is History?History is a field dedicated to interpreting andunderstanding continuity and change over timeand space. History is the first and most pure of thehumanities. It focuses on understanding the “why” ofthe human condition as much as the “how” or “whathappened.” But history is not a static and unchangingfield. Our views and methods for understandingthe past are constantly evolving. Naturally, thisleads to an unending debate about the meaning andsignificance of the past. As such, a good portion ofhistory has taken on the elements of the social scienceslike anthropology, sociology, political science, andeconomics, which were originally spin offs of history.As a graduate student in history, however, you mustremember that your task is not to use history tomake predictions about the future as social scientists.You may adopt their methods and approaches, butremember your fundamental goal always shouldremain understanding continuity and change overtime and space. This is the goal of every historian andshould be your primary goal as a graduate student inthe Norwich graduate history program. Because theprimary objective of historians is to attempt, (to thebest of their ability), to understand and appreciate thepast, historians borrow heavily from the insights ofother fields such as psychology, medicine, archeology,mathematics, as well as specific subfields of historylike cultural (race, class, and gender) and intellectualhistory (the history of ideas and the men and womenwho developed them). The various fields and sub-fieldsof history encompass every human activity. Military orAmerican history is just one of many fields of history. 22If you would like to know just how diverse the various fields of history are, I invite you to examine the program for the American HistoricalAssociation’s (www.thehistorian.org) annual convention or the H-Net Humanities discussion network at Michigan State University.11

The key to becoming a respected historian is tohave a broad and deep understanding of your field’shistoriography and be open to the ideas of other fieldsof inquiry. This entails understanding the obstaclesthat all historians face when trying to understand thepast. It also entails understanding other disciplinesand other fields of history that can enrich ourunderstanding of our specific field of history. Wecannot have a very deep understanding of history ifwe do not understand the evolution of science andtechnology or the political, diplomatic, economic,social, cultural, intellectual, and ideological factors thatinfluence events or shaped societies. Historians mustalso develop an understanding and appreciation of“human nature” or human psychology to understandwhat may have motivated specific patterns of humanbehavior or specific courses of action.Obstacles to understanding the past:History is an unending debate about the meaningof the past. Understanding the past as it was andinterpreting its meaning is an exceedingly difficultendeavor. While historical facts are indisputable, themeaning of the past and the causality of events as wellas the quality and meaning of historical evidence is thefodder of intense debate among historians.The Civil War presents an excellent example of theongoing debate about the past and its meaning. Italso presents an excellent example of the concept ofhistoriography. Historians continue to debate andinvestigate all aspect of the Civil War, but some of thelarger questions historians continue to debate are: “Wasthe war inevitable or avoidable?” and “What provokedthe conflict?” How each historian answered thosequestions was often influenced by whether he or shewas a Southerner or Northerner. Interpretations of thewar and its causes were also influenced by the era inwhich the historian lived.Obviously the first histories of the Civil War werewritten by the generation that directly experiencedthe conflict. Northerners generally blamed the South,and what they saw as a “slaveholder conspiracy”for provoking the conflict. During the 1850smany Northerners became convinced the South’sslaveholding elite were more committed to thepreservation of slavery and its expansion into theterritories of the American west than the preservationof the Union and US Constitution. Although mostNortherners rejected the idea of racial equality, theydid view slavery as a morally repugnant institution.The intractable issue of slavery, as well as the secessionof the Southern states from the Union and the firingon Fort Sumter in April 1861 was considered by manyNortherners the root cause of hostilities.Of course, Southerners viewed the conflict in muchdifferent terms. To Southern historians, the conflictwas about protecting freedoms guaranteed under theUS Constitution from a tyrannical federal government.Southerners believed that like the generation thatfought the War of Independence, they had no otherchoice than to secede and establish their own country.The war, to Southerners and their sympathizers, wasprovoked by the election of Abraham Lincoln, theactivities of abolitionist zealots, Northern aggressionand Northern meddling in business that was theprerogative of the States. To Southerners writing in theimmediate post-war era, slavery was a moral institutionthat provided for and controlled a race of humansthey believed were inferior to whites, incapable ofsupporting themselves or handling the responsibilitiesof citizenship. 3In the years immediately following the destructionof the Confederacy, a third school of interpretationemerged that blamed extremist elements of boththe North and the South for the conflict. This schoolinterpreted the war as something that could havebeen avoided if not for the extremism of Northernabolitionists and Southern secessionists and123Such ugly racial stereotypes were common throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth century. The South did not, by any means, havea monopoly on racism. Racial violence occurred in both the North and South in the century following the Civil War. While Northernerscondemned the institution of slavery, most did not subscribe to the idea of racial equality. Legal and socially sanctioned discrimination andracist assumptions about the proper place of blacks in American society were not systematically dismantled until the Civil Rights movementof the 1950s and 1960s. Arguments about the morality of slavery are certainly repugnant to us in the 21st century, but the historian mustunderstand the ideology of the times they study.

overzealous defenders of the institution of slavery.According to this interpretation, the actions offirebrands and radicals on each side enhanced sectionaldiscord, closed down all possibility of compromise, andultimately provoked armed conflict.By the late nineteenth century, historians views ofthe Civil War began to change and a new school ofinterpretation emerged. The historians of this eragenerally had no direct experience of the conflict andwere therefore able to view the past with a measureof detachment. Consequently, the histories producedin this era were far less partisan. Much of this can beattributed to the “zeitgeist” or “spirit of the times” asthis era was characterized by an emerging Americannationalism and a waning of hard feelings producedby the war. This new nationalism paved the way for ameasure of healing between North and South and thehistories of the Civil War produced in this era offeredmore balanced and sophisticated insights. Nationalisthistorians generally blamed the South for provokingthe conflict by attempting to expand slavery into thewestern territories and viewed slavery as the primarycause of the conflict. These historians, however, rejectedany notion of a “slaveholder conspiracy” or “abolitionistconspiracy.” Instead they argued that slavery becameembedded in Southern society and economic lifedue to a confluence of technological developments inthe early nineteenth century and powerful economicforces. In the view of these historians, Northernerswere hardly above reproach as Northern industriesand consumers profited from trade based upon theSouth’s “peculiar institution” and therefore helped makeslavery a more intractable problem. Slavery in theSouth and the absence of slavery in the North meantthat each section developed very different cultures andeconomies as well as political and social values. Thesedifferences naturally exacerbated sectional differences.Nationalist historians generally rejected the notionthat the conflict was in any way avoidable, but saw thewar as something that was ultimately good. The wardestroyed slavery as well as the volatile sectionalismthat characterized the politics of the antebellum period.The war also spurred the industrialization of theUnited States, and helped it emerge as a great power bythe end of the nineteenth century. While the war wasdestructive in both lives and property, in the opinion ofnationalist historians it was something that ultimatelymade the country stronger.In the early twentieth century, the currents ofhistoriography shifted yet again as the new Progressivehistorians interpreted the conflict. Progressives generallyfocused on domestic reform, social problems andcurbing the influence of big business in national politics.Progressive historians generally viewed history as acycle of conflict between economic and social classes.Progressives saw the roots of the conflict in the social,political, and economic struggle between the Southernslaveholding aristocracy and Northern industrialists,workers, and farmers. While the North prevailed, manyProgressives bemoaned the outcome as the postwar erawas characterized by rapid industrialization, unbridledcapitalism and a host of social, political and economicproblems that required reform.Marxist 4 historians took the Progressive interpretationa step further by arguing the Civil War represented yetanother step toward an inevitable revolution by theproletariat. To Marxists, the war was a good thing as itdestroyed slavery and ushered in a new era of capitalismand national unity. The next stage in the historicaldevelopment of the United States was, to Marxisthistorians, a conflict that would ultimately destroycapitalism. During the Great Depression, a time in whichmany believed capitalism was discredited as an effectiveand just economic system, Marxist interpretations ofhistory enjoyed a measure of popularity.4Historians often use the word “Marxist” in ways that do not necessarily mean a historian is a card carrying communist with pictures ofLenin, Stalin and Mao above their mantel. Often historians will describe something or someone as “Marxist” in the sense that they are“economic determinists”, i.e. they believe economic forces are the primary catalyst for historical events. Graduate students need to becareful in discerning whether a historian is Marxist (i.e. communist), or simply an economic determinist. During the 1930s, quite a fewintellectuals became infatuated with communism and embraced Marxism, but this love affair faded as the true nature of communist rulebecame apparent during the Cold War. Please keep in mind that one can be an economic determinist without being a communist.13

In the 1930s and early 1940s, yet another school orinterpretation of the Civil War emerged. This wasthe “revisionist school” 5 and this interpretation wasinfluenced by disillusionment with the experience andconsequences of the First World War and the rise oftotalitarianism in the interwar period. This interpretationargued that the Civil War could have been avoided andthe differences between the sections were not so great orintractable as to make war inevitable. Revisionists tendedto blame extremists, politicians that chose to exacerbatethe sectional conflict for political gain, and a generationthat allowed itself to be led by rabble rousers. Revisioniststended to see all wars as avoidable and that war itselfwas a social pathology. Obviously the perceptionsof the “revisionist” school were colored by the deepdisillusionment with the results of the First World Warand influenced by a pacifist outlook that characterizedthe political culture of the democracies in the 1920sand 1930s.With the experience of the Second World War and theevil epitomized by the Axis, some historians in the 1940sbegan to reject the arguments and assumptions of the“revisionist school.” While accepting that war was horribleand evil they argued that under certain circumstancesit could be the lesser of two evils. Historians of this erabelieved nothing other than war could have destroyedNazi Germany or Imperial Japan. In examining the CivilWar, these historians saw the conflict as both inevitableand just because no other method could have destroyedslavery and reunified the country. This understandingabout the nature of war in general and the Civil War inparticular also found support in the early Cold War asthe nation confronted the evils of communism and builta powerful military force capable of going to war at amoment’s notice.In the 1950s and 1960s, the historiography of theCivil War continued to evolve. Some of the best worksin this era resist classification as their sophisticatedinterpretations of the war synthesized the mostconvincing aspects of the nationalist, Progressive,revisionist, and post-revisionist arguments. With theexplosion of sub-fields and the hyper-specializationof the historical field in the 1960s, scholars began toexamine the impact of political ideology, party systems,voting behavior, religious, cultural and ethnic issuesand utilized quantitative methods to examine whatfactors may or may not have led to the Civil War.The main point of this basic outline of thehistoriography of the Civil War is to point out thathistory is not static, but an evolving field of inquiry.History is not only influenced by the concerns andperspectives of the present, but also by how we weighand perceive a variety of evidence. Each generation ofhistorians will look back on the past and interpret itsmeaning. The debate about the meaning, significance,and causality of historical events will continue until theend of human civilization.A review of the historiography of the Civil War shouldalso raise important and perhaps unsettling questionsregarding objectivity and truth. The concept of truthis a tricky thing in the history profession. Historianscertainly distinguish truth, or right or wrong, whenit comes to facts. The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor,not the Germans, and a mountain of documents,physical evidence and eyewitness accounts provethe Holocaust did indeed occur. An event eitherhappened or it did not. The difficult part comes withinterpretation. Certainly historians should rejectsources or interpretations that are suspect, fictional orbased upon suspect evidence. However, in investigatingthe past is it possible to determine what interpretation145The term “revisionist history” usually has a very ugly connotation in popular culture. Often this is used as a criticism of an interpretationthat does not conform to one’s particular political ideology or cherished “historical memory” or belief. Historians use the word in a muchdifferent context. Because history is an ongoing debate about the meaning and significance of the past, our understanding and perceptionof the past is constantly being revised. Revisions also occur when significant new evidence about the past is unearthed. For example in the1970s, our understanding of many aspects of the Second World War was revised when the National Archives released documents revealingthe Allies had succeeded in breaking the codes of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Our understanding of the war on the Eastern Frontwas also revised when, upon the fall of the Soviet Union, scholars were granted access to Soviet military archives. For historians, revision is agood thing and contributes to our understanding of the past and the debate about its meaning and significance. In a sense, each generation ofhistorians are revisionists because the significance and meaning of the past is under constant scrutiny.

is closest to the truth or history “as it was”? Of all thevarious schools of interpretation regarding the CivilWar, which one is the best, most accurate interpretationof the war and its causes? This question is impossibleto answer because vast portions of the past are lostto us. Even in our individual lives it is impossible tohave a complete record of all our actions, thoughtsand experiences, and our memories of past eventscan fade or change over time. In addition, humanpsychology and the subconscious means individualsare often completely unaware of all the reasons for aparticular action, decision or behavior. History, unlikescience or mathematics, which permits independentverification of discoveries via logic and the scientificmethod, cannot be repeated. We cannot travel backin time or isolate a past era in a lab and study it untilcertain verifiable truths are revealed. So, unfortunately,history cannot work its way toward truth in the senseof knowing everything about the past or work towardsome absolutely definitive, verifiable conclusion aboutwhy something occurred and its meaning. The bestit can do is develop interpretations that are credibleand supported by the best available evidence. Unlikethe sciences, history operates on a continuum of graysrather than stark blacks and whites. This means thatevery interpretation has its strengths and weaknesses.It also means historians can examine the same bodyof evidence, but come to very different interpretationsabout an event.In a sense, the job of a historian is not unlike thatof a police detective. Under the best circumstancesdetectives arrive at a crime scene that has beensecured and has not been contaminated. Professionalcriminalists collect physical evidence linking thesuspect to the scene, and the victim and/or witnessesprovide statements consistent with the physicalevidence and accounts of other witnesses. In cases ofassault, rape or murder, the body of the victim willprovide additional physical evidence. In some instancessurveillance cameras will record the crime. Under thesecircumstances, the truth or facts of the case and theguilt of the accused is exceptionally easy to establishbeyond a reasonable doubt.Some cases are far more difficult to solve. State,federal and local police forces all have “cold cases”that have not or cannot be solved due to a lack ofevidence or leads. In some cases crime scenes becomecontaminated, witnesses will not cooperate withdetectives or will give fragmented or contradictoryaccounts. Sometimes witnesses will be of questionablecharacter and intentionally provide unreliable,dishonest statements. In some instances there are nowitnesses and exceptionally intelligent and carefulcriminals will do a thorough job destroying evidencelinking them to the crime. Occasionally, incompetentdetectives or prosecutors will bungle an investigationor dishonest police will plant evidence or coerce aninnocent person into confessing to a crime they didnot commit. Under these circumstances, guilt beyonda reasonable doubt is difficult to prove and defenseattorneys have exceptional opportunities to discreditwitnesses and evidence and provide compellingalternative explanations to jurors.In many ways historians are analogous to detectives ordistrict attorneys working a difficult cold case featuringa contaminated crime scene, limited body of evidence,contradictory and occasionally unreliable witnessaccounts, and multiple suspects with motive andopportunity. The complexity, number of suspects andlimited evidence of the case permits the developmentof numerous theories, based upon the evidence, aboutwho did what to whom and why. To take the legalanalogy a step further, historians constantly havethe past on trial and are, like prosecutors or defenseattorneys, attempting to convince a jury of theirarguments about their evidence, as well as the causalityand significance of events.15

Objectivity and the concept of “absolute truth” is alsoa difficult concept for budding historians and thereare some facets to the problem of objectivity andtruth that need to be explored. Often the complaintabout objectivity is raised when a person encountersan historical interpretation that is not consistent withhis or her political beliefs, preconceived notions orcherished memories about the past. History is notabout buttressing a specific political ideology orreinforcing preconceptions or popular myths aboutthe past, it is about understanding the past in all itscomplexity. There is a distinct difference betweenbeing a historian and being an ideologue. Ideologuesview everything through a well defined and oftenrigid set of concepts regarding how things are andhow they should be. Ideologues are intellectuallyinflexible. History, on the other hand, is so complexthat it does not neatly fit in any ideological box.Historians certainly have their own religious andpolitical beliefs, but true scholars are open minded,critical thinkers who are capable of acknowledgingother interpretations that may not be consistent withtheir privately held beliefs have merit and may enhanceunderstanding of the past.Objectivity is a problem for historians because itsuggests human beings are capable of representing factsand information in an impartial, detached manner. Thisis not a large problem when we discuss historical facts,but it does become problematic when humans interpretfacts and attempt to determine the significance andmeaning of past events. It is impossible for humans tointerpret history in a completely impartial, objectivemanner. All humans have lenses through which theyview the world. These lenses are shaped by factors suchas class, race, religion, gender, education, nationality,language, and culture. Often we are not even awareof these influences as they can be very subtle orcompletely subconscious. These influences actuallyprogram how our brains perceive and interpret reality.Barbara Oakley, the author of Evil Genes, wrote:“As a language and surrounding culture are learned,however, it subtly shapes perception, often in ways inwhich people aren’t consciously aware. Those who growup speaking Chinese, for example, process mathematicsin different areas of the brain than those who growup speaking English as their first language... Chinesespeakers literally see the world differently than Englishspeakers—eye tracking studies show that Englishspeakers tend to first focus on individual items in theforeground of the picture, while Chinese speakers tendto first take in the background and the picture as awhole.” 6Because culture actually influences the wiring of ourbrains and how we view the world, how is it possibleto determine whether a particular interpretationof history is correct and objective? How does oneprove it is objective? In the brief summary of thehistoriography of the American Civil War providedabove, what specific interpretation is the mostobjective? Unfortunately it is impossible for humansto definitively answer these questions because wehave no way of viewing the past or our current realityobjectively. The brief review of the historiographyof the American Civil War demonstrates thatinterpretations of that conflict evolved over time andwere influenced by the major events or “zeitgeist” ofa specific era. The best we can do is to carefully studythe past and determine which specific interpretation ismost credible. We must also concede that others mayview the past in different ways and that subsequentgenerations will most likely view the past throughdifferent lenses.The impossibility of viewing the past in a trulyobjective manner suggests that views of the past arerelative and often determined by a number of culturalinfluences. This, however, creates yet another problem.While historians will accept a certain degree ofrelativism in the interpretation of the past, taken to itsextreme the concept of relativism also suggests that allinterpretations of history are equally valid. In its mostextreme forms, this suggests that the Nazi or neo-Naziinterpretation of history and denial of the Holocaust6Barbara Oakley, Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed, and My Sister Stole My Mother’s Boyfriend, (New York, NY:Prometheus Books, 2008), 175-176. Oakley is a scientist and engineer investigating the role of genetics in borderline personality disorder,Machiavellianism, and malignant narcissism and how these disorders may affect the brain.16

is as valid as any other. Fortunately, historians do notaccept this sort of extreme relativism and defendthe concept that some interpretations are more validand credible than others. For example the Nazi viewof history is built upon a belief in a grand “Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy,” race hierarchy, extreme form ofSocial Darwinism, irrationalism and a rather bizarreand perverted mysticism. No historical evidencesupports the major tenants of the Nazi view ofhistory. Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers also ignoremountains of evidence documenting the horrendouscrimes of the Nazi regime. Because historians are, likedetectives, dedicated to understanding the past via thedocuments and physical evidence left behind, Nazior other extreme interpretations of history are notaccepted as credible or valid.Historians, therefore, find themselves in a very difficultposition. Total objectivity is impossible to achieve whilerelativism, taken to its most extreme form, createsa world in which the most loathsome and flawedinterpretations are as valid as those based upon solidevidence and careful scholarship. The best historianscan do is strive toward objectivity, be ruthlessly selfcritical,acknowledge (to the best of our abilities), thecultural lenses through which we view the past, andbase our interpretations on a careful examination of allthe available evidence.17

Master Of Arts in Military HistoryMH 510: Introduction to History and HistoriographySeminar Description:The first seminar examines how military historydeveloped as a distinct discipline, and will trainyou in the “tools of the trade”: historiography andmethodology. Historiography, or the art of practicinghistory as a distinct discipline, is an examination of thehistory of historical thought, from the first works ofhistory in the classical world to the present time. Theseminar will cover some of the varied historiographicschools and concepts that have evolved. Historicalmethodology—changes in the methods of “doing”history—will also be studied. How do historiansgather information and formulate hypotheses? Thedevelopment of research methods, including theuse of primary and secondary sources, is discussed.History involves interpretation; the role of objectivity,selectivity, and bias are examined. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of thegeneral trends of historiography in general andmilitary historiography in particular.• Demonstrate a higher level understanding ofthe values and ethics underpinning the historicalprofession.• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of theproblems inherent in understanding the past andinterpreting the meaning of events.• Demonstrate an ability to properly document sourcesusing the Chicago Manual of Style format.• Demonstrate graduate level writing skills.18

MH 520: Global Military History to 1789(previously called The Western Way of War)Seminar Description:This seminar will examine the global patterns ofwarfare, on land and at sea, from the ancient world tothe eve of the Industrial Revolution. Special emphasisis placed on continuity and change in warfare andsocioeconomic and cultural factors. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:MH510 or by Program Director permission.Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Students will be able to describe, analyze and evaluatethe major conceptual and philosophical approachesto doing history as well as the major historiographicapproaches of global military history.• Students will be able to describe, analyze and evaluatethe major historiograhic debates, the use of historicalevidence, the logic of argumentation and how to dealwith issues that have no clear answer.• Students will be able to describe and analyze theproblems of primary source materials and buildinterpretive skills.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writingand the skills of analysis, synthesis, argumentand significance through their papers anddiscussion postings.MH 530: Military Thought and TheorySeminar Description:This seminar studies the most influential militarytheoreticians and strategists from the period of theThirty Years War to the present day. You will examine thetheories of Clausewitz, Jomini, Douhet, Mahan, Corbett,and Mao Tse-Tung. This seminar also examines theoriesof deterrence and nuclear war as well as post-Maoistrevolutionary warfare. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of militarytheory and practice both across time and culture.• Demonstrate the ability to perform historical researchat the secondary source level.• Demonstrate the ability to conduct and presentanalysis synthesis, argument and significance (ASAS)through effective writing.• Demonstrate a familiarity with the secondaryliterature and historiography in military theory.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writingand the skills of analysis, synthesis, argumentand significance through their papers anddiscussion postings.MH 540: Non-Western Military History(Seminar 4 elective)Seminar Description:This seminar will examine some of the major historicalfactors that have shaped the military trajectory of themodern extra-European (and North American) world.This encompasses the following areas: Asia, Africa andLatin America, with particular focus on the nineteenthand twentieth centuries. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:MH510, MH520 and MH530 or by permission of theProgram Director.Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Understand the political, economic and socialunderpinnings of the traditional militaryestablishments of Asia, Africa and Latin America;• Understand the nature of early modern militarytechnology in those regions and the impact of theintroduction of European technology, not just interms of hardware, but also its social and culturalramifications.19

• Explain the reasons for European domination ofmuch of Asia, Africa and Latin America by thenineteenth century.• Comprehend how societies in Asia, Africa andLatin America responded to the European challenge,including military modernization.• Consider the domestic political, economic, social,and cultural ramifications of military development.For example, the evolution and impact of civilmilitaryrelations.• Gain a broad understanding of change andcontinuity over time in the militaries of Asia, Africaand Latin America.• Become familiar with some of the major historiographicissues and scholarly resources on the military historyof Asia, Africa and Latin America.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writingand the skills of analysis, synthesis, argumentand significance through their papers anddiscussion postings.MH541: Chinese Military History (Seminar 4 elective)Seminar Description:This seminar will provide an introduction to Chinesemilitary history, covering a wide range of topicsincluding military thought, strategy and tactics,technologies, and cultural factors as they pertainedto the waging of war. This offering will introducestudents to the latest scholarship and interpretations,which both challenge and complement aspects ofthe debates about the “Western way of war.” Studentswill be strongly encouraged to think comparativelythroughout the class. In the process, we will attemptto determine if any society had definitively uniqueapproaches to warfare or if the universals are far moreimportant than the specifics. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:MH510, MH520, MH530 or by permission of theProgram Director.Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of militarytheory and practice in China.• Demonstrate the ability to perform historical researchat the secondary source level.• Demonstrate the ability to conduct and presentanalysis synthesis, argument and significance (ASAS)through effective writing.• Demonstrate a familiarity with the secondaryliterature and historiography in the military historyof China.MH 550: US Military History (elective)Seminar Description:This seminar will serve as your graduate-levelintroduction to American military history fromthe colonial era to the present. It is not a survey ofAmerican military history. Instead, during this seminar,you will examine specific debates that shape Americanmilitary historiography, such as the nature of Americas’wars, the evolution and character of American civilmilitaryrelations, and the structural development ofthe US military. This seminar’s overarching theme isthe existence (or not) of an “American Way of War” andhow that way of war has affected the means by whichAmericans have waged war. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisiteMH510, MH520, MH530, MH540, MH541 or bypermission of the Program Director.Objectives to be met:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of militarytheory and practice in the US.• Demonstrate the ability to perform historical researchat the secondary source level.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writingand the skills of analysis, synthesis, argumentand significance through their papers anddiscussion postings• Demonstrate a familiarity with the secondaryliterature and historiography in US military history.20

MH 551: Race and Gender in Military History(elective)Seminar Description:This seminar will cover the complex issuessurrounding racial integration in military institutions,including intriguing questions around citizenship andethnicity. Students will also examine the history ofwomen’s participation in warfare and issues of genderintegration in the military. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:MH510, MH520, MH530, MH540, MH541 or byProgram Director permission.Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Understanding warfare in contexts: socio-economic,political, and cultural.• Understanding how race and gender influencedmilitary institutions and warfare and vice versa.• Deciphering historiographic controversy and howhistorians argue.• Analyzing primary sources and how historians think.• Developing the analytical tools needed for a betterunderstanding of race and gender as conceptualframeworks.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writingand the skills of analysis, synthesis, argumentand significance through their papers anddiscussion postings.MH552: Total War (elective)Seminar Description:This seminar will examine the origins of the conceptand practice of “total war” in the period from theFrench Revolution to the end of the Cold War. TheFrench Revolution, Napoleonic Wars, American CivilWar, First World War, and Second World War willbe examined. Students will examine the evolutionof modern war, the characteristics of “total war” aswell as the usefulness of the concept of “total war” indescribing these massive conflicts. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:MH510, MH520, MH530, MH540, MH541 or bypermission of the Program Director.• Understand the concept and history of total war (or“unlimited war”).• Demonstrate an understanding and graduatelevel analysis for the reasons behind the increasingdestructiveness of warfare from the seventeenth tothe twentieth centuries.• Demonstrate a mastery of the secondary literatureand historiography of “unlimited” or total war via ahistoriographic essay of a specific conflict.• Demonstrate graduate level writing and analyticalskills via discussions and writing assignments.21

MH 561: Capstone PaperThe capstone paper is the final and most importantcomponent of your degree. Your capstone will be awriting sample of great interest to a PhD admissionscommittee and should focus on analysis, synthesis,argument and significance (ASAS). In some instanceswe encourage students to pursue the publication oftheir capstone in academic journals. (6 credit hours)Your capstone should demonstrate you have:• A higher level understanding of the generaltrends of general historiography as well as militaryhistoriography.• The ability to perform historical research, atthe primary source level, though under certaincircumstances this may be impossible, and at thesecondary source level.• The ability to analyze and synthesize your researchthrough effective writing that demonstrates the abilityto argue new, original and unique points of historicaland historiographic significance.• A mastery of the secondary literature andhistoriography of your capstone topic.• A higher level understanding of the values and ethicsunderpinning the historical profession.MH569: Comprehensive ExaminationThis degree completion exercise is designed to assessstudents’ knowledge of military history in generaland the specific subfields they have studied duringtheir program of study. In each examination studentsmust demonstrate graduate 3 level knowledge of thepertinent historiography of the field(s) examined intheir course of study, graduate level analysis, an abilityto synthesize information from various scholarlysources, and develop and defend their interpretationof historical events. Students must also make acredible case regarding their argument’s historical andhistoriographic significance.Pre-requisite:Successful completion of Seminars 1-6.MH570: MA ThesisThe MA thesis is an original research projectdemonstrating the student’s ability to conduct primarysource research and mastery of the historiographygermane to the research question. The thesis mustalso demonstrate graduate level analysis, synthesis,and argument, and make a compelling case for theargument’s historical and historiographic significance.The MA thesis will require students to make anindividual, original, extended, and in-depth studyof an approved research question within the fieldof military history. The MA thesis requires researchutilizing primary documents. Students pursuing aresearch question requiring primary and/or secondarysources in a foreign language must demonstrateadvanced reading proficiency in the pertinent foreignlanguage(s). Proficiency will be demonstrated via anexternal assessment such as the Defense LanguageProficiency Examinations, Foreign Service Instituteexaminations or reading comprehension tests approvedby the American Council on the Teaching of ForeignLanguages. If required for the research project, proofof foreign language competency must accompany thepetition for the thesis option. Thesis and additional feeswill be applied. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisite:Approval of Program Director, Associate ProgramDirector for Academics and Capstone Director,successful completion of Seminars 1-5, and ifapplicable, advanced reading knowledge of thepertinent foreign language(s).22

Master of Arts in History-American HistoryMH 510: Introduction to History and HistoriographySeminar Description:The first seminar examines how history developedas a distinct discipline, and will train you in the“tools of the trade”: historiography and methodology.Historiography, or the art of practicing history as adistinct discipline, is an examination of the history ofhistorical thought, from the first works of history inthe classical world to the present time. The seminar willcover some of the varied historiographic schools andconcepts that have evolved. Historical methodology—changes in the methods of “doing” history—will alsobe studied. How do historians gather information andformulate hypotheses? The development of researchmethods, including the use of primary and secondarysources, is discussed. History involves interpretation;the role of objectivity, selectivity, and bias areexamined. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of thegeneral trends of historiography in general andAmerican historiography in particular.• Demonstrate a higher level understanding ofthe values and ethics underpinning the historicalprofession.• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of theproblems inherent in understanding the past andinterpreting the meaning of events.• Demonstrate an ability to properly document sourcesusing the Chicago Manual of Style format.• Demonstrate graduate level writing skills.23

HI520: Colonial, Revolutionary and Early NationalHistorySeminar Description:This seminar explores American history from theera of contact through the early nineteenth century.The seminar is organized on a thematic rather thanchronologic basis. It introduces students to the mainthemes and historiography of the period. Discussionsand readings will lead students to examine areas ofearly seventeenth through early nineteenth centuryAmerican history and historiography. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of the generalthemes and historiography of the colonial, revolutionaryand Early National period of American history.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writing andthe skills of analysis, synthesis, argument andsignificance through their papers and discussionpostings.HI530: Nineteenth Century American HistorySeminar Description:This seminar explores American history from the EarlyNational period to the eve of the First World War.This seminar is organized on a thematic rather thanchronologic basis. It introduces students to the majorthemes and historiographic debates of this period ofUS history. Discussions and readings will lead studentsto examine areas of nineteenth century Americanhistory and historiography. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of thegeneral themes and historiography of the nineteenthcentury of American history.HI540: Twentieth Century American HistorySeminar Description:This seminar explores American history in thetwentieth century. Its approach is thematic rather thanchronologic. It introduces students to the major themesand historiographic debates of this period of UShistory. Discussions and readings will lead students toexamine specific areas of twentieth century Americanhistory and historiography. (6 credit hours)Seminar Goals and Objectives:• Demonstrate a higher level understanding of thegeneral themes and historiography of the nineteenthcentury of American history.• Students will demonstrate graduate level writing andthe skills of analysis, synthesis, argument andsignificance through their papers and discussionpostings.GU590: Directed ReadingsIn the fifth seminar MA in American History, studentswill take on directed readings.This seminar will require students to make an original,extended and in-depth study of an approved topicwithin their field of study. (1-6 credit hours)MH 561: Capstone PaperThe capstone paper is the final and most importantcomponent of your degree. Your capstone will be awriting sample of great interest to a PhD admissionscommittee and should focus on analysis, synthesis,argument and significance (ASAS). In some instanceswe encourage students to pursue the publication oftheir capstone in academic journals. (6 credit hours)Your capstone should demonstrate you have:• Students will demonstrate graduate level writing andthe skills of analysis, synthesis, argument andsignificance through their papers and discussionpostings.24

• A higher level understanding of the general trendsof general historiography as well as Americanhistoriography.• The ability to perform historical research, atthe primary source level, though under certaincircumstances this may be impossible, and at thesecondary source level.• The ability to analyze and synthesize your researchthrough effective writing that demonstrates the abilityto argue new, original and unique points of historicaland historiographic significance.• A mastery of the secondary literature andhistoriography of your capstone topic.• A higher level understanding of the values and ethicsunderpinning the historical profession.MH569: Comprehensive ExaminationThis degree completion exercise is designed to assessstudents’ knowledge of American history in generaland the specific sub fields they have studied duringtheir program of study. The goal of the writtenexamination is to assess student knowledge in thefield of military history. In each examination, studentsmust demonstrate graduate level knowledge of thepertinent historiography of the field(s) examined intheir course of study, graduate level analysis, an abilityto synthesize information from various scholarlysources, and develop and defend their interpretationof historical events. Students must also make acredible case regarding their argument’s historical andhistoriographic significance.MH570: MA ThesisThe MA thesis is an original research projectdemonstrating the student’s ability to conduct primarysource research and mastery of the historiographygermane to the research question. The thesis mustalso demonstrate graduate level analysis, synthesisand argument, and make a compelling case for theargument’s historical and historiographic significance.The MA thesis will require students to make anindividual, original, extended, and in-depth studyof an approved research question within the field ofAmerican history. The MA thesis requires researchutilizing primary documents. Students pursuing aresearch question requiring primary and/or secondarysources in a foreign language must demonstrateadvanced reading proficiency in the pertinent foreignlanguage(s). Proficiency will be demonstrated viaexternal assessments such as the Defense LanguageProficiency Examinations, Foreign Service Instituteexaminations or reading comprehension tests approvedby the American Council on the Teaching of ForeignLanguages. If required for the research project, proofof foreign language competency must accompany thepetition for the thesis option. Thesis and additional feeswill be applied. (6 credit hours)Pre-requisites: approval of Program Director,Associate Program Director for Academics andCapstone Director, successful completion of Seminars1-5, and if applicable, advanced reading knowledge ofthe pertinent foreign language(s).Pre-requisites: Successful completion of Seminars 1-6.25

Program Standards, Assignments and ExpectationsWho to call for help:Prospective MAH students and applicants shouldcontact their MMH Admissions Advisors for anyquestions regarding their application.Admissions Advisors:Tara SaltChristine Gagnontsalt@grad.norwich.educgagnon@grad.norwich.eduQuestions or problems of an academic nature shouldfirst be taken up with your seminar instructor. If theproblem cannot be resolved, you may wish to contactthe Associate Program Director, Professor John “Doc”Broom at jbroom@norwich.edu. If Professor Broomcannot resolve the issue, he will refer it to theMMH/MAH Program Director, Professor JamesEhrman at jehrman@norwich.edu.Capstone related questions should be referred to yourcapstone advisor or the program’s Capstone Director,Dr. John Grenier, who can be reached atjohn.grenier@comcast.net.Reading skills for Graduate Students:One of the most shocking things students encounterwhen they enter any graduate program in history is thesheer size of the reading assignments for each seminar.In traditional, residential programs it is not unusual forprofessors to assign students a book or two each week.Reading and mastering a 200-400 page book each weekcan be a challenge, especially if you have a demandingday job and busy family life. In the MMH/MAHprograms, we try to keep the reading load to around200-300 pages per week although there will be weeksthe load exceeds this.We all love to read history as a relaxing leisure activity,but you cannot approach your MMH/MAH readingsin the same manner. In leisure reading, we have the26

time to read and absorb every single page as well asthe time to reflect on the information or story beingpresented. You will not have the luxury of doing thatfor your MMH readings and will have to develop thecapacity to “gut” or skim a book quickly.So, how do you “gut” a book in a week in order to makesome intelligent and insightful critiques of the work inyour discussion forum? Here are some tips:1. Carefully read the preface or introduction to determinethe author’s thesis or main argument. When you find thethesis statement highlight it or write it down.2. In the preface or introduction, the author mightoutline the entire argument of the book chapter bychapter, so be sure to take note of this. The authormight also indicate where his or her work fits in theexisting historiography of the topic. This is importantinformation so take note of this as well.3. Note when the book was published, this mightyield important information regarding the majorintellectual currents that may have influenced the bookand whether the argument is dated. Obviously a bookon the Civil War written in 1880 will have a differentperspective and sources than one written in 1976.4. Carefully dissect each chapter. Locate the thesisstatement and outline the argument of each chapterand how it fits into the main thesis of the book.5. Pay careful attention to the sources the authoruses to support the argument. For example if thebook is making an argument about German militaryeffectiveness on the Eastern Front in the Second WorldWar and relies almost exclusively on German sources,it may be presenting a skewed view. Also if the bookrelies almost exclusively on secondary rather thanprimary or archival sources, there may be reason todoubt its level of scholarship.6. Once you have completed items 1-5 above, considerthe argument the author presents. Is it compelling?Plausible? Credible? What are its strengths andweaknesses? What historical examples support orcontradict it?7. Take all the information you have gathered in items1-6 above and compile it all into a synopsis no longerthan 1 single-spaced page. Store it in a place where itis accessible such as a three ring binder. Do this withall the books you read in graduate school as it can be auseful reference for PhD preliminary examinations orwhen you write a lecture for a history class.8. Only after you have completed steps 1-7 above—andonly if you have sufficient time—should you beginreading the book page by page. If a more careful readof the book reveals that something in steps 1-7 shouldbe revised, then do so immediately.The book and article dissection assignments areintended to help you refine this skill. By compilinga three ring binder of book and article dissectionsyou have read for your graduate work, you will havea very useful reference that will help you prepare forcomprehensive examinations or build a college levelcourse on a specific topic.Proper DocumentationIn the United States, historians document their workusing the Chicago Manual of Style (CMS) system offootnotes and bibliographies. All your papers shouldutilize Chicago-style footnotes and bibliographies.Instructors will not accept work documented usingthe APA or MLA system, which permits parentheticalcitations. Chicago-style footnotes should usesuperscripted numbers next to the text you aredocumenting. Microsoft Word helps automate footnoteplacement and numbering so be sure you understandhow to use this function of your word processor beforeyou hand in your papers.As a MMH/MAH student you will have access to thecomplete 15th and 16th edition of the Chicago Manualof Style via the Kreitzberg Library. Norwich has anelectronic subscription to this reference.The use of the full Chicago Manual of Style must beused for all paper assignments. In the case of discussionpostings, a modified form of the Chicago system, asoutline below, is permitted due to the technologicallimitations of the learning management system (LMS).LMS systems may not allow for the use of the fullChicago Manual of Style citation system in discussionpostings unless you cut and paste from MS Word.So for your discussion posting, you’ll use a modified27

CMS format using (#) within the text of the discussionposting and endnotes at the end of the discussionposting if you do not cut paste and from MS Word.The precise tabbing and spacing may not be possiblewith the Norwich University’s LMS (Angel) but thefundamentals can be used.Writing and Research StandardsHistorians communicate via books, articles andreviews. Consequently, advanced writing skills are vitalto your success in this program. Each seminar in theMMH/MAH programs requires a number of differentwriting assignments. They might be short books andarticle dissections, analytical essays or short papers,research papers, or historiographic essays. Whateverthe assignment, proper grammar and clarity areimportant elements of your writing. If a paper is poorlywritten or uses improper grammar, it will be penalized.Be sure to proofread your paper prior to submittingit to your instructor. Reading your paper aloud toyourself is an excellent way to catch errors. An evenbetter method is to exchange papers with a trustedclassmate and proofread each other’s papers.In your research and writing, keep these general rulesin mind:1. Writing should be clear, concise and grammaticallycorrect.2. Organize your writing so it flows logically from onepoint to another.3. Focus on argument, synthesis, analysis andsignificance, (ASAS) rather than narrative, descriptivetreatments of your subject. This distinguishes graduatepapers from undergraduate papers.4. Avoid Pentagon or defense industry lingo, clichés,buzzwords and phrases in your writing.5. Understand the historiography of your topic and themajor interpretations and books for your particularsubject.7. Learn to differentiate between scholarly and popularsources. Do not use any source that has not gonethrough a scholarly peer-review process. Coffee tablebooks and Wikipedia are not serious sources andshould never be included as a source in any paper.8. If in doubt about a source, ask your professor.9. Proofread, proofread, proofread.Book Dissections: 8Introduction and Objectives:Chemists and biologists perform much of theirresearch in laboratories. The library is the historian’slaboratory, and books and articles are the primarytools of our research. The single most basic skill forany historian is to know how to read a historicalmonograph critically and thoroughly. That meansknowing the parts of a book, grasping the argumentsof its author, and understanding other historians’criticisms and analyses of that book. It also means thathistorians must be able to efficiently explain to otherswhere they found the information or interpretationsthey use in their own work. Since historiansare entrusted with the past, they carry a lot ofresponsibility for getting it right. They must check theirsources for bias, confirm their information from asmany sources as possible, try as hard as they can to beobjective in their own work, and make sure someoneelse has checked their work before they publish it. Thisexercise is designed to help students develop some ofthose skills. Everyone is an historian to some extentand; it’s important to be a good one.This exercise is also a very useful habit to acquire for yourfuture work in the field of military history. It is often usedin traditional MA and PhD history programs. Compilinga binder of such dissections on all the books and/orarticles you read is an excellent way to help prepare forpreliminary examinations and is also very helpful whenteaching or writing in a particular area of history.6. Carefully document your sources using the ChicagoManual of Style. Learn how to paraphrase informationas well as gracefully weave direct quotes into your paper.288This assignment was developed by Professor Reina Pennington (Norwich University) for the MMH program from the “Book DissectionExercise” developed by Professor Greg Monahan of Eastern Oregon University.

Having such a binder is invaluable when you are asked toteach in a particular area, or cannot remember the thesisof a particular book or your own reactions to a particularmonograph. A binder full of book dissections also helpsyou synthesize vast sections of history. As you finish theMMH program and begin your work in this field either asa teacher or writer, I would encourage you to methodicallybuild a bank of book dissections on all your readings inmilitary history.The PaperPart One: Citation/Acknowledgments/AuthorCredentialsThe first page of your paper will contain the citationand acknowledgments analysis. This portion of theassignment allows you to describe certain physicalparts of the book and cite it properly. Answer thefollowing questions and perform the following:1. Type out a bibliographical citation (not a footnote orendnote citation) at the beginning of Part One, using“Chicago style” bibliographical style (sometimes called“works cited” format). The form must be precisely correct.2. What is the ISBN (International Standard BookNumber) of your book? If it does not have one, what isits L.C. (Library of Congress) number?3. Does it have an index? How useful is the index?Does it include multiple ways of finding entries (crossreferencing)and index entries for topics as well asproper names?4. How is the bibliography of the book organized?Is it annotated?5. Approximately what percentage of the sourcesthe author cites in her/his notes are primary? Whatpercentage are secondary? Did your author consultarchives or depend entirely on published materials?6. Who read all or part of the book prior to its publicationto check it for mistakes? What organization, if any,supported the author with money to do the research and/or writing of the book? (This information can usually befound in the Preface or Introduction).7. What are the author’s credentials? Evaluate theauthor’s education; use of languages appropriate to thetopic; other works on the topic; and professional work.Part Two: ArgumentsThe purpose of monographs is to present evidence(sources like documents, letters, interviews, and officialrecords) and argue an interpretation of that evidence.Your purpose in this section of the paper is tosummarize the arguments of the author of your bookand indicate some of the evidence used to supportthose interpretations. This part is the most involved,and requires a thorough reading of the book.Review the assigned chapters or portions of the book,looking for the key chapters that contain arguments,new ideas, controversial discussions, etc. and analyzethe arguments in those chapters. (In general, theintroduction and conclusion chapters are not suitable.)Once you have completed your review of the assignedreadings, write three sentences—and only three—onyour chosen chapters of the book, as follows:1. Give the chapter number and title.2. For the first sentence on each chapter, begin with thewords, “The main subject of this chapter is . . . ” Thesubject is the general topic of the essay, but specificenough to identify this chapter or article compared toothers. Complete the sentence using your own words;do not repeat the essay title in your description.No footnote is needed since you are summarizing theentire chapter rather than referring to a specific pointor quotation in the article.3. For the second sentence on each chapter, begin withthe words, “The author’s purpose in this chapter isto argue that . . . ” An argument, or thesis, is a pointof view or interpretation; it is what the author seesas the meaning or significance of facts, rather thanthe facts themselves. Readers may agree or disagreewith the author’s argument. Complete the sentence byquoting exactly what you believe is the author’s centralargument. Footnote this sentence according to ChicagoManual of Style note citation style.29

4. For the third sentence on each chapter, begin with thewords, “One key piece of evidence the author uses tosupport his/her case is . . . ” List only ONE piece of relevantevidence. Evidence is very specific and is generally fromprimary sources (documents, letters, interviews, andofficial records). Do not quote exactly. Paraphrase bydescribing the evidence in your own words.Footnote this sentence according to Chicago Manual ofStyle note citation style.Example:“Chapter 1 is entitled, “Title.” The main subject of thischapter is . . . The author’s purpose in this chapter isto argue that . . . One key piece of evidence the authoruses to support his/her case is . . .”5. After you have written a trio of sentences for eachchapter, write one single paragraph at the end ofPart Two of your paper summarizing the author’sarguments as a whole.Example:“In summary, the author is attempting to show that . . .”Part Three: Analysis and CritiquePart Three of the paper is more free-flowing and allowsyou to evaluate the book in terms of its value as a source.In this section, you have only one thing to do:1. First, analyze the argument from the standpointof the course. What did this book teach you that youdid not already know about military history? Was theargument convincing? Well-supported? (This is not aliterary critique; it is not particularly relevant whetheryou thought the book well-written or interesting).Style, Spelling, GrammarAll papers are expected to be written in clear, correctEnglish with proper spelling. A good, solid dictionaryand a thesaurus should be your constant companionswhen you write any college paper. Use a spell checker,if you’re using a computer—but be aware that thecomputer can’t correct mistakes like loose/lose or it’s/its (your grammar guide includes a useful “Glossary ofUsage” which all writers should review periodically.)Be precise and direct in your writing.John DoeMMH Seminar XX: Seminar TitleWeek X: Book DissectionMarch 18, 2007Part One: Citation, Acknowledgments and AuthorCredentials.Record, Jeffrey. The Wrong War: Why We Lost Vietnam.Annapolis, MD: Naval InstitutePress, 1998. ISBN: 1-55750-699-X.The author, Jeffrey Record, earned his PhD from JohnHopkins University and wrote a dissertation thatexamined the socio-economic background of VietCong defectors. Dr. Record is a defense analyst andhas taught courses on the Vietnam War at the GeorgeInstitute of Technology, North Georgia College andthe US Air Force’s Air War College. Professor Recordhas also served as a fellow for several Washington,DC area think tanks, as a staff member for the USSenate Armed Services Committee and has publisheda number of monographs on US military history andstrategy in the post-1945 era. Professor Record’s book,The Wrong War, includes a very useful index withthorough cross-referencing. The bibliography is notannotated and is divided into two sections: “Books andReports” and “Articles and Speeches.” The organizationof the bibliography makes it more difficult todetermine what primary or archival sources wereused in writing this monograph. A quick review of theauthor’s bibliography and footnotes indicate the bookis based on an impressive number of quality secondarysources but perhaps no more than five percent of thebook is based on primary sources. The book doesnot contain acknowledgments or a preface, so it isnot possible to determine if any organization helpedfinance the author’s research and writing or assisted inediting the monograph.30

Part Two: ArgumentsChapter 1 is entitled, “The Reasons Why.” The mainsubject of this chapter is to review the reasons why theUnited States military forces became involved in theVietnam War. The author’s purpose in this chapter isto argue that “US foreign policy decision makers in themid-1960s committed a supreme act of misjudgmentby intervening directly in the Vietnam War.” 9 Onekey piece of evidence the author uses to support hiscase are quotes from President Kennedy and Johnsonindicating these men, despite misgivings aboutbecoming involved in Vietnam, feared serious domesticpolitical consequences if they failed to prevent the fallof South Vietnam to communist forces. 10Chapter 2 is entitled, “Stakes, Stamina and FightingPower.” The main subject of this chapter is to reviewthe motivation, will power and goals of the NorthVietnamese, Viet Cong and the United States. Theauthor’s purpose in this chapter is to argue that,“when the time came for its turn in Indochina, theUnited States, for cultural and political reasons, alsounderestimated the patience, tenacity and militarycapacity of the Vietnamese communists, while at thesame time inflating its own power to prevail over whatwas, after all, an impoverished, pre-industrial state.” 11One key piece of evidence the author uses to supporthis case are official US and Vietnamese governmentstatistics indicating communist losses amounted tonearly five percent of North Vietnam’s total population,a level of sacrifice far exceeding anything in theAmerican military experience. 12Chapter 3 etc... (if needed you can analyze the entirebook chapter by chapter)Part Three: Analysis and EvaluationRecord’s book provides a superb and forceful analysisof the Vietnam War and provided information onboth the tenacity and staying power of the NorthVietnamese, as well as the extraordinary hollownessof the South Vietnamese regime, that I did not knowbefore. His argument is sound and well supported byboth primary and secondary sources. The analysisprovided in The Wrong War also indicates that superiortechnology and material, an essential component ofthe “Western Way of War” and “American Way of War”theses, neither guarantees victory nor compensates forgross flaws in strategy and leadership. Consequentlythese “ways of war” may not be as superior and decisiveas their proponents suggest. The most provocativechapter in the book is entitled, “The War on thePotomac,” and reveals the nation’s most powerfulmilitary and political leaders were completely lackingin moral integrity and unwilling to make wisebut difficult, unpopular and controversial choicesregarding US involvement in Indochina. Instead,America’s political leadership placed its own politicalambitions and agendas above the long-term interestsof the nation. The Joint Chiefs of Staff also bear someresponsibility for the debacle in Vietnam by urging theescalation and Americanization of the conflict at keypoints and for failing to confront President Johnsonand Secretary of Defense McNamara over theirmismanagement of the war. When it became clear thatthe South Vietnamese regime was not reliable or viable,and the costs associated with maintaining a noncommunistSouth Vietnam far exceeded the benefits,the Joint Chiefs did not urge withdrawal. Their silencehelped prolong the conflict and increase the cost ofthe war. In retrospect, had the Joint Chiefs of Staffbeen assertive and vocal in their calls for an Americanwithdrawal from South Vietnam it may have insulatedPresident Johnson from the domestic political backlashhe feared would occur if he “lost Vietnam.”While Record’s book is a superior piece of analysis, thereader should be aware of one potential weakness ofthe book. The subject of Vietnam remains a very rawand provocative issue for the generation that foughtthe war or protested it at home. Record served inVietnam with the State Department’s Civil Operationsfor Revolutionary Development Support (CORDS)in the Mekong Delta in 1968. The author indicateshe believed throughout the war that the American9Jeffrey Record, The Wrong War: Why We Lost in Vietnam, (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1998), 1.10Record, The Wrong War, 8-9.11Record, The Wrong War, 29.12Record, The Wrong War, 36-37.31

effort in Vietnam was counterproductive and theSouth Vietnamese regime unviable. Record’s viewson Vietnam certainly contradict those of others suchas William Colby or Richard Nixon, who maintainthat South Vietnam enjoyed a favorable set ofcircumstances after the Tet Offensive of 1968, but thatdiminished American domestic support for the warand the Watergate scandal destroyed any prospect ofcontinued American support for South Vietnam.Record provides an excellent analysis of the war, butone must question how dispassionate and objectivehe could be in evaluating a conflict he experiencedfirsthand.Article Dissection Paper GuidelinesIntroduction and ObjectivesThe goals of writing an Article Dissection Paper arevery similar to those of a Book Dissection Paper, buthave a more limited scope. Please review the BookDissection Paper guidelines for additional information.There are several important objectives of this exercise:• to read critically, analyze arguments and use evidence• to understand the differences between scholarly andpopular history• to use proper Chicago-style citation, and understandthe difference between note style and bibliographicor “works cited” style• to understand the importance of “scholarlyapparatus” (citations, bibliographies and indexes)• to learn how to paraphrase, how to use exactquotes properly and how to write conciselyThe Paper:The purpose of monographs is to present evidence(sources like documents, letters, interviews, and officialrecords) and argue an interpretation of that evidence.Your purpose in this section of the paper is to summarizethe arguments of the author of a scholarly article andindicate some of the evidence used to support thoseinterpretations.1. Type out a bibliographical citation (not a note citation)using “Chicago-style” bibliographical style (sometimescalled “works cited” format), as defined in the ChicagoManual of Style. Be sure to use the format for anarticle in a journal or a selection from an anthology, asappropriate. The form must be precisely correct.2. Write three sentences as follows:• The first sentence begins with the words, “The mainsubject of this chapter is . . . ” The subject is thegeneral topic of the essay, but specific enough toidentify this chapter or article compared to others.Complete the sentence using your own words; do notrepeat the essay title in your description. No footnoteis needed, since you are summarizing the entirearticle rather than referring to a specific point orquotation in the article.• The second sentence begins with the words, “The author’spurpose in this chapter is to argue that . . . ” An argument,or thesis, is a point of view or interpretation; it iswhat the author sees as the meaning or significanceof facts, rather than the facts themselves. Readers mayagree or disagree with the author’s argument. Completethe sentence by quoting exactly what you believe isthe author’s central argument. Footnote this sentenceaccording to Chicago Manual of Style note citation style.• The third sentence begins with the words, “One keypiece of evidence the author uses to supporthis/her case is . . . ” List only ONE piece of relevantevidence. Evidence is very specific and is generallyfrom primary sources (documents, letters, interviews,and official records). Do not quote exactly. Instead,paraphrase by describing the evidence in your ownwords as concisely as possible. Footnote this sentenceaccording to Chicago Manual of Style note citation.• Write a final single paragraph analyzing the articlefrom the standpoint of the course. What did thisarticle teach you that you did not already knowabout military history? Was the argumentconvincing? Well-supported? (This is not a literarycritique; it is not particularly relevant whether youthought the article was well-written or interesting.)The entire Article Dissection Paper should not be morethan 1-1 ½ pages.32

Style, Spelling, GrammarAll papers are expected to be written in clear, correctEnglish with proper spelling. A good, solid dictionary anda thesaurus should be your constant companions whenyou write any college paper. Use a spell checker, if you’reusing a computer—but be aware that the computer can’tcorrect mistakes like loose/lose or it’s/its (the Little, BrownEssential Handbook includes a useful “Glossary of Usage”all writers should review periodically.) Be precise anddirect in your writing.John DoeMMH Seminar XX: Seminar TitleWeek X: Article Dissection ExampleMarch 7, 2007Lynn, John. “The Trace Italienne and the Growth ofArmies: The French Case.” The Journal of MilitaryHistory 55, no. 3 (July 1991): 297-330.The main subject of this article is to study whetherGeoffrey Parker’s argument linking the increasing useof the trace italienne style fortress to the rapid growthof European armies, and European absolutism, in theearly modern period explain the rapid growth of theFrench armies in the same era. The author’s purposein this article is “to demonstrate that such a great andinfluential phenomenon as army growth did not arisefrom a single technological innovation, such as thetrace italienne.” 13 One key piece of evidence the authoruses to support his case are statistics regarding Frenchsieges in the period 1445-1715 which reveal that thesize of French armies engaged in sieges remainedremarkably stable between 1445 and 1715. 14Lynn’s article does an admirable job using the Frenchexample to challenge Parker’s broad assertions regardingthe link between the trace italienne, the size of Europeanarmies, and the rise of European absolutism. The articleis well documented and clearly reasoned. Like a lawyerapproaching a complex case, Lynn lays out a wellorganized and persuasive argument that, in the Frenchexample, the trace italienne was not the factor thatprovoked the growth of large French armies and Frenchabsolutism. A careful reading of Lynn’s article indicates thegrowth of European military forces and the evolution if itspolitical systems in the early modern era are multifacetedand complex. The growth of French military forces andthe French state are far too complex to be neatly explainedaway by a single factor such as the trace italienne. WhileLynn does make a persuasive case against Parker’s thesisand suggests population growth and prosperity weremore likely causes for the growth in French armies andthe development of French absolutism, his alternativeexplanation tantalizes rather than satisfies. Lynn failsto fully develop his alternative explanation or presentevidence documenting an increase in French prosperityand population in this era, its relation to the size of Frencharmies and the number and quality of French fortresses.Historiographic Essays:This particular type of essay reviews the body ofinterpretations on a particular subject. It generallytraces the evolution of interpretations of a topicover time and analyzes how and why interpretationschanged. An annotated bibliography is a helpfulfirst step in writing a historiographic essay. Insome seminars you may be required to write ahistoriographic essay covering a particular conflict orarmed force. Our objective in assigning historiographicessays as the end-of-seminar long paper is to introduceyou to the concept of historiography and help youbecome more of an expert in a particular topic. Thiswill be valuable to you should you teach a course on aparticular conflict and will be a helpful skill to masterwhen it is time to research and write your capstoneprospectus and paper.A portion of your capstone prospectus will cover thehistoriography of your capstone topic. The objectiveof this is to help the student know and understand theexisting literature on the topic and determine where theirpaper fits in the existing historiography. Historiographicessays are also helpful to professional historians in thecourse of their research or in developing a course orseminar because these essays summarize the major worksof a specific field as well as outline the major schools orinterpretations that have evolved over time.13John Lynn, “The Trace Italienne and the Growth of Armies: The French Case,” The Journal of Military History 55, no. 3 (July 1991): 323.14Lynn, “The Trace Italienne and the Growth of Armies,” 307-310, 324-328.33

Some of the seminars lectures in the Norwich Masterof Arts in Military History program are historiographicessays. A historiographic essay by Professor JohnGrenier has been included in this survival guide as anexample. This essay is a weekly lecture from our USMilitary History seminar.MMH 550: American Way of War Week 2American War for Independence, 1775-1783By John Grenier, PhDWhen considering the historiography of the AmericanWar for Independence (AWI), we need to keep inmind that the conflict occurred in the context ofthe American Revolution, a distinct but interrelatedevent of the war. Too often, students think that theycan talk about the Revolution and the AWI as thesame event. The historiography of the AmericanRevolution encompasses the political, intellectual,cultural, and social aspects of the American strugglefor independence, which some historians begin as earlyas 1765 and end as late as 1789. The historiographyof the war proper, in which we are more interested aspractitioners of military history and students in a MAprogram in military history, brackets the years between1775 and 1783. Of course, works of the “new militaryhistory” and the War and Society approach have greatlybroadened our understanding of all the aspects of theRevolution including military, but they have done sofrom the starting point of the war as opposed to thenon-military catalyses of the larger movement for (andconsequences of) independence.Nonetheless, any student who does not understandthe broad historiographic “lay of the land” on theRevolution cannot hope to master the nuances ofthe historiography of the military struggle. It istherefore imperative that you, as a graduate student,be able to speak to the basics of American Revolutionhistoriography. What follows therefore is anintroduction to that historiography. From that point,we will move on to works that specifically addressthe military aspects—the battles and campaigns; theorganization; the strategy, operations and, tactics; andthe leadership/personalities—of the AWI.Naturally, Americans expressed a keen interest inthe Revolution in the years immediately followingindependence. William Gordon published the firstproper history of the Revolution in 1788, a mere fiveyears following the Peace of Paris that officially endedthe war. A dissenting minister, Gordan (Gordon) LNplaced blame for the Revolution on the British crown’sattempts to usurp the colonists’ rights and liberties asEnglishmen. David Ramsay, a participant in the war,followed and noted that the colonists, by the period ofthe Revolution, had created their own forms of libertyand government, and in many ways were destinedto rebel if only to realize the promise of Americanexceptionalism. The inference that you can take fromthose early works, at the very least, is that Gordan andRamsay’s works stand as the genesis for a “nationalist”lens through which to view not on the Revolution, butall American history.Taking that nationalist cue, antiquarian historiansfocused most of their attention on the actions of the“heroes” of the Revolution. Mercy Otis Warren’s bodyof work, as well as “Parson” Mason Locke Weem’s Lifeof George Washington (1801), point to the importanceof the handful of “Great Men” that led the Revolution.Little more than secular hagiography, the earlybiographies of the Revolution’s leadership furtherengendered the notion of American exceptionalism.George Bancroft’s History of the United States (1834-1874) best exemplifies the resultant “Whig School”that defined the Revolution as the search for and themanifestation of liberty. Bancroft’s massive body ofwork outlined a course of national development fromarbitrary monarchical rule to self-government andfreedom. For the Whig School, “American Freedom”was divinely sanctioned … an early instance ofAmerica’s Manifest Destiny. It therefore did nottake long for the Revolution to fall into place as acomponent piece of the Turnerian interpretation ofUS history.34

Anglophile American scholars of the BritishEmpire naturally could not abide the Whig School’sinterpretation. Leading intellectuals such as HerbertLevi Osgood, Charles McLean Andrews, and GeorgeLouis Beer therefore sought to contextualize andexplain the Revolution in terms as an event within thelarger framework of the Empire. They found that thecrown hardly intended to tyrannize their Americansubjects, rather after 1765 faced an imperative toconfront colonial challenges to royal authority andFrench geopolitical moves. Such views dovetailednicely with developments in British historiography (forexample, the work of Lewis Namier) that stressed theimportance of monarchical—“court” and “country”—politics to the eighteenth-century British politicalnation. These scholars noted that a small elite sharedpatronage, power, and prestige in British politics,and it remained loath to share the spoils of rule withtoo many metropolitan Britons, let alone colonists.Americans, in demanding extra-Parliamentaryprivileges (for instance, the radical notion that theymust have actual representation to be taxed) upset theeconomic applecart.Once the factors of money and wealth bubbled tothe surface, historians naturally took a closer lookat economic causes for the Revolution. The ensuingProgressive interpretation of the Revolution centeredon the conflicts between property-owning elites andothers in the colonies. For the Progressives (CharlesBeard, J. Franklin Jameson, Carl Becker, et. al.), theRevolution began as an attempt of commercial andproperty-owning elites to garner a larger piece of theEmpire’s economic pie, then to try to quash the lowerclasses’ more radical and economically egalitariandemands. The ongoing class between democratic andaristocratic classes was a logical view for a generationof historians who lived through the Great Depressionand were particularly fond of the New Deal. Well intothe 1950s, the Progressive historians wrote a consensusthat defined the Revolution as a socioeconomic event.The Cold War, and Americans’ distaste for “Marxist”interpretations that used socioeconomic factorsto power historical change, saw historians of theRevolution search for something more “noble andpure” than base economic motivations to explain whyAmericans rebelled. The Neo-Whig interpretationemerged. It pointed to the colonists’ defense offreedom and constitutional principles as the drivingforce behind the rebellion. Edmund S. and Helen M.Morgan used The Stamp Act Crisis (1953) to show thatthe colonists were not crass rabble-rousers, but ratherprincipled men who stood ready to protect abstractideas of liberty. Indeed, those ideas—the ideology—of liberty quickly became the point on which thehistoriography of the Revolution pivoted.Bernard Bailyn published the last generation-and-ahalf’s most influential book on the Revolution in 1967.His The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution,in which he argues the Revolution was an “ideologicalconstitutional”struggle that fed upon the rhetoricof British politicians who decried the dangers ofcorruption and conspiracy, defined the Revolution asessentially a conservative event, one to protect Englishrights and liberties rather than to build upon Americanideals. Gordon Wood, Bailyn’s star pupil at Harvard,responded with The Creation of the American Republic(1969) that presents Americans, over the course of theRevolution, engaged in a heated debate about creatingnew concepts. They embraced a distinctive Americanidea of divisible sovereignty that in turn engendereda federal system of rule. One of Wood’s other majorworks, The Radicalism of the Revolution (1984), asthe title suggests, points to the radical/democratic/liberal nature of the Revolution, the counter-tact toBailyn’s turn that saw the constitution as a conservativereaction to the excesses of the Revolution. The logicaloutcome of Revolutionary era republicanism was,according to Wood, Jacksonian Democracy, in all itspolitical, economic, cultural, and social facets. In the1980s, Bailyn and Wood’s writings on the Revolutionbecame fodder for the “Republican Synthesis”historians who sought to define American historyin terms of the development of a republican vice, amonarchical society and polity.35

Many of the Republican Synthesis historians owed anintellectual debt to the social and cultural historianswho preceded them. In the 1970s, with the rise ofinterest in “history from the bottom up,” scholarsbegan to examine the Revolution from perspectivesdifferent than those of the elites. Women, Loyalists,African-Americans, Indians, and frontiersmen, toname a few, all became the subject of studies. Theresult continues to be an avalanche of works on thepolitical, intellectual, cultural and social aspects of theRevolution. About the only high-level observation thatwe can make from that historiography is to note itsfracturing of the field. Grand narrative and overarchingthemes are difficult to discern. Instead, details andminutia in literally hundreds of specialized studies, asin most every field in American history, have becomethe norm.So, where does that put us in trying to make senseof the military historiography of the AWI? Generalstudies of the war abound, but frankly, only threeare really worth your attention as graduate students.Richard Middlekauf ’s The Glorious Cause (1982)and Don Higginbotham’s The War for AmericanIndependence (1971) are both excellent works, withHigginbotham’s work, although significantly older thanMiddlekauf ’s, having more a military history focus.Stephen Conway’s The War of American Independence(1995) offers the best short interpretation of the war, aswell as the best view of it from the British perspective.There is no shortage of battle studies of the AWI.Nonetheless, there exist a handful of excellentcampaign/battle histories by professional historians.The important point to remember about these isthat they focus on much larger themes than the“drum and bugle” approach to military history. DavidHackett Fisher’s Washington’s Crossing (2004), offersa compelling narrative, and more important for ourpurposes, profound analysis on the Trenton/PrincetonCampaign of 1776-1777. Other fine campaignstudies, albeit slightly formulistic, include RichardKetchum’s series of works on the major battles of thewar: Yorktown (Victory at Yorktown, 2004); Saratoga(Saratoga, 1997), LN and Bunker Hill (The DecisiveDay, 1974). His The Winter Soldiers (1973), likeWashington’s Crossing, focuses on Trenton/Princeton,and is what I believe to be the best of his books. Forthose who want to know more about the Southerncampaigns, Lawrence Babit’s A Devil of a Whipping(1998) and John Dederer Making Bricks without Straw(1983), if one can move past the latter’s ahistoricism(especially now that you have progressed throughSeminar 4) are insightful and useful studies. RussellWeigley, a name familiar to you all by this point in yourstudies, offered the Partisan War in 1970. It remainsan excellent account and analysis of the irregularstruggle in the Carolinas. No single volume adequatelyaddresses the frontier aspects of the AWI. JohnGrenier’s First Way of War (2005) touches on it, but isby no means the final word on the subject. An olderbut still excellent work that touches on the Southernfrontier is John Alden’s The South in the Revolution(1957).A handful of historians have taken the creation andorganization of the Continental Army as their focus.James Kirby Martin, Mark Lender, et al.’s A RespectableArmy (1982) is one of the best collections on theContinentals, and goes far to putting down old tropesabout the AWI. For the American militia, and theimportant role it played in the war, two books areof particular importance. The first, Mark Kwasny’sWashington’s Partisan War (1996) does a remarkablejob of explaining Washington’s changing attitudes anduse of irregulars, particularly in the New York-NewJersey-Connecticut theater of operations. Second,several essays in John Shy’s A People Numerous andArmed (1976) are must reads for understanding thevaried roles, motivations, and reactions of the militiaas well as Loyalists. While speaking of Shy’s work,every student who graduates with a MA in militaryhistory should read Shy’s Toward Lexington (1965),which rightly can be considered the work that startedthe “new military history.” For a work that focuses oncivil-military relations within the American camp, andpaints a fairly bleak picture of them, see Wayne Carp’sTo Starve the Army at Pleasure (1990).After reading Carp’s work, you hopefully will beinclined to see the war as a more complex eventthan you had previously. If Carp does not inspirethat, perhaps James Kirby Martin biography ofBenedict Arnold, Benedict Arnold, Revolutionary Hero36

(1997) will. If we can move beyond chest-thumpingcondemnations of Arnold’s treason, we might be ableto at least better understand Arnold’s motivations, andthrough them, the varied responses to the war. Indeed,a great deal needs to be done to get to the nuances ofwhy, how and when individuals fought the war. Twovery important biographies that go far toward doingthat, and in many ways debunk some of the AWI’smyths (such as the sharp-eyed fighting frontiersmenas well as a mass popular uprising against the Britishin the South) are Don Higginbotham’s Daniel Morgan(1979) and Robert Bass’s Swamp Fox (1989).Of course, it remains difficult to find too critical anassessment of George Washington. One book thatmay be helpful in shaping your views on Washington’sgeneralship is Edward Lengel’s General GeorgeWashington (2005). While many have written thatWashington could do no wrong, there is no shortage ofstudies that suggest his opponents were near blitheringidiots. However, students would be well served byreading George Billias’ George Washington’s Opponents(1969) and Ira Gruber’s The Howe Brothers and theAmerican Revolution (1972) for works that explains thetremendous challenges that confronted the British highcommand. The best book on war at the strategic level,the proper purview of those generals, remains PiersMackesy’s War for America (1964). If you were to readonly one book on the AWI from all those mentioned inthis lesson, read Makesy’s.A basic familiarity with the works mentioned hereshould lead you down other paths of inquiry, to morespecialized and focused studies. It should be clearby this point, as well, that AWI historiography hasnot progressed in as linear and definable pattern asthe historiography of the Revolution. There are fewschools within the field that compete with one another,and generally speaking, the works to emerge on themilitary history of the AWI are hardly contentious.Of course, one could argue the reason for the lackof contention and conflict in AWI historiography isthat historians have not asked the difficult questions.As aspiring Masters of the Historical Arts, it is up toyou to use those complex questions to establish yourgeneration’s school of thought on not just the AWI, butthe Revolution as a whole.Suggested Reading(Note: Only modern and easily accessible works arelisted)Alden, John. The South in the Revolution, 1765-1783.Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1957.Babits, Lawrence. A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle ofCowpens. Chapel Hill: University of North CarolinaPress, 1998.Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the AmericanRevolution. Cambridge: Belknap Press of HarvardUniversity Press, 1967.Billias, George A. George Washington’s Opponents:British Generals and Admirals in the AmericanRevolution. New York: Morrow, 1969.Carpe, Wayne E. To Starve the Army at Pleasure:Continental Army Administration and AmericanPolitical Culture, 1775-1783. Chapel Hill: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1984.Conway, Stephen. The War of American Independence.New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995.Dederer, John. Making Bricks without Straw: NathanielGreene’s Southern Strategy and Mao-Tse Tung’s MobileWar. Manhattan, KS: Sunflower University Press, 1983.Fisher, David Hackett.Washington’s Crossing. New York:Oxford University Press, 2004.Grenier, John. The First Way of War: AmericanWar Making on the Frontier, 1607-1814. New York:Cambridge University Press, 2005.Gruber, Ira. The Howe Brothers and the AmericanRevolution. New York: Atheneum, 1972.Higginbotham, Don. The War for AmericanIndependence: Military Attitudes, Policies, and Practice.New York: Macmillan, 1971.37

Higginbotham, Don. Daniel Morgan, RevolutionaryRifleman. Chapel Hill: University of North CarolinaPress, 1961.Ketchum, Richard M. The Winter Soldiers: The Battles forTrenton and Princeton. Gardon City, NY: Doubleday, 1973.Ketchum, Richard M. Decisive Day: The Battle forBunker Hill. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974.Ketchum, Richard M. Saratoga: Turning Point ofAmerica’s Revolution. New York: H. Holt, 1997.Ketchum, Richard M. Victory at Yorktown: TheCampaign That Won the Revolution. New York: H. Holt,2004.Kwasny, Mark. Washington’s Partisan War, 1775-1783.Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1996.Lengel, Edward. General George Washington: A MilitaryLife. New York: Random House, 2005.Macksey, Piers. The War for America, 1775-1783.London: Longmans, 1964.Martin, James Kirby. Benedict Arnold, RevolutionaryHero: An American Warrior Reconsidered. New York:New York University Press, 1997.Martin, James Kirby, Mark E. Lender, et. al. A RespectableArmy: The Military Origins of the Republic, 1763-1789.Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan Davidson, 1982.Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause: The AmericanRevolution, 1763-1789. New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1982.Shy, John. A People Numerous and Armed: Reflectionson the Military Struggle for American Independence.New York: Oxford University Press, 1976Shy, John. Toward Lexington: The Role of the BritishArmy and the Coming of the American Revolution.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965.Wood, Gordon S. The Creation of the AmericanRepublic, 1776-1787. Chapel Hill: University of NorthCarolina Press, 1969.Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the AmericanRevolution. New York: Random House, 1992.Weigley, Russell. The Partisan War: The South CarolinaCampaign of 1780-1782. Columbia: University of SouthCarolina Press, 1970.Capstone ProspectusA capstone prospectus is a document that helpsstudents outline the historiography of their topic andframe the question they propose to explore in theircapstone paper. Below is an example of a very highquality prospectus.ProspectusBy: Kalli J. RitterCapstoneProfessor John GrenierNovember 25, 2008For a multitude of reasons, World War II remainsone of the most studied conflicts among amateursand professionals alike. Historians can now studythe conflict with a fair amount of objectivity as theintervening years have largely erased any biasesresulting from the intensity and the all-or-nothingnature of the conflict. At the same time, the fact thatWorld War II occurred in the modern era meanshistorians have access to a wealth of resources largelyunavailable to those absorbed in the study of earlierwars. Despite the enormous amount of attentiondevoted to the subject, many facets of the war stillremain unexplored. Among these unexplored areas,few topics present a question as intriguing as therelationship between the Nazi Party’s anti-Slavicpolicies and their effect on the German home front.Specifically, how did the German perception of Russiain general and the Soviet Army in particular influencewomen within Germany and the wartime decisionsmade to protect them?Somewhat surprisingly, the answer to such a complexquestion proves remarkably simple: the rhetoricthat served as a foundation for the Nazi Party’searly successes fatally limited the Party’s optionsas the war progressed. Swept into office amidst a38

smokescreen of traditional values and a dedication toreturning women to the role of mother, Hitler and hiscompatriots established two dangerous precedents.First, by upholding motherhood as the proper andideal occupation for women, the Nazi Party preventedeffectual mobilization of half of Germany’s population.Second, the rhetoric established an equally strongexpectation for men to protect and provide forwomen. While neither of these concepts representparticularly revolutionary ideas, the ardor with whichthe Nazi regime advocated them prevented Germanyfrom abandoning them when confronted by wartimenecessity as its antagonists did.The other major tenet of Nazi ideology—Aryan racialsuperiority—played a significant role as well. The earlypropaganda used to vilify the Russians and therebyjustify the German violation of the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact combined with the already prevalentbelief of Slavic inferiority to produce widespread fearof the Soviet Army out of all proportion to its actualcapabilities. The German women’s fear bolstered theresolve of German men to defeat the Russian hordes.The speed and thoroughness of the initial Germanvictories dispirited many Soviets and convincedlarge numbers to lay down their weapons, but thebrutal treatment of these captives at the hands of theGermans turned the conflict on the Eastern front intoa grudge match of momentous proportions. 15 As theconflict dragged on, the brutality escalated, increasingthe fear of German men for their wives and daughtersback home. This in turn encouraged them to newlevels of brutality, perpetuating the cycle. By the timethe Russians began their final offensive drive into thecrumbling German state, the tenacity of the Germandefense inspired reprisals of the sort long described inNazi propaganda efforts, resulting in a sort of selffulfillingprophecy.This cyclical relationship between the events onthe Eastern Front and the reactions of the largelyfemale population back on the German home frontdemands further attention because it suggests apreviously overlooked link between racial and genderissues within the policies of Nazi Germany. Thisargument also considers Nazi propaganda from awhole new perspective—the impact it had on its owngovernmental policies. Even a dictatorship such asNazi Germany could not afford to break faith with itsvery publicly established agenda without running therisk of alienating the army and its citizens alike. Quitepossibly the segment of people most affected by Nazipropaganda consisted of the German policy makers.In order to establish the existence of a relationshipbetween race and gender in the policies of NaziGermany, I intend to analyze the philosophy of theNazi Party, Nazi propaganda, women’s combat roles inWorld War II, and rape during wartime. Undeniablya disparate collection at first glance, these subjectsactually point to a complex interrelated social tapestrythat dictated Germany’s actions during World War IIjust as much as any battlefield outcome. In brief, I willprove that the philosophy of the Nazi Party dictatedtheir social policies towards women. That philosophyand the policies derived from it formed the basisof a majority of the Nazi propaganda. In turn, thatpropaganda influenced the actions of German men andultimately contributed to the Russian excesses at theclose of the conflict.Since very few historians have yet to take up the challengeof uncovering the correlation between race and genderissues in Nazi Germany, little real historiography existsfor the topic. Gisela Bock’s “Racism and Sexism in NaziGermany: Motherhood, Compulsory Sterilization, and theState,” proves the exception to the rule. Bock took the firstreal steps towards establishing a connection between theracial and gender policies of Nazi Germany, but her effortfocused on the rather narrow subject of reproductionissues under the Nazi regime. She failed to expand hertopic to include an analysis of how the government’spolicies (and the people’s reaction to them) impacted thewar effort. Despite this shortfall, Bock’s work deservesrecognition because it stands alone in its attempt to linkrace and gender issues during the time period in question.Although not dealing directly with the link betweengender and race issues within Nazi Germany, RichardJ. Evans’, “German Social Democracy and Women’sSuffrage 1891-1918,” provides important socialbackground information. The fact that the women’ssuffrage movement developed in tandem with the15George Fischer, “Vlasov & Hitler,” The Journal of Modern History 23, no. 1 (1951), 58.39

German socialist movement probably cast the idea ofwomen’s enfranchisement and the women’s movementin general in a radical light. Additionally, the closerelationship between communism and the women’smovement in the not too distant past probablycontributed to the Nazi Party’s gender discrimination.After all, the barbarian Slavic race represented themain proponent of communism. And if women hadpreviously associated with the socialist movement, thenthey might also share something in common with thebarbarians.With the exception of Bock and Evans, no otherhistorian has really explored the possibility of alink between race and gender policies within NaziGermany. Fortunately, more works of solid historicaland sociological value exist for each of the componenttopics I plan to construct my thesis around.In terms of understanding the philosophy guidingNazi Germany, one cannot do much better thanAdolf Hitler’s work, Mein Kampf. Far from a literaryor historical masterpiece, it nonetheless captures thetwisted logic and xenophobic rhetoric of the Nazileader far better than any secondary source. Lookingbeyond the repetitive and sometimes confusing prose,one can discern the anti-Slavic and chauvinistic beliefsHitler managed to conceal during his campaign forpower, but which would significantly influence hispolicies once in office.Not all would agree on the importance of Hitler’spersonal beliefs on the development of Nazi policy,however. Some historians, H. W. Koch among them,contend that the German staff, not the Fuhrer, viewedSlavic Russia as the major threat. In his article,“Hitler’s Programme’ and the Genesis of Operation,Barbarossa,” Koch argues convincingly that Hitlerhad little to do with the decision to attack Russia. Ihighlight this article because even though debate maysurround the question of who exactly wielded thepower in Nazi Germany, almost no contention existsregarding that person or person’s view of Soviet Russiaas a menace more terrifying than any of the Westernpowers due to the perceived inferiority and barbarismof the Slavic race.In order to understand the impact Nazi philosophyhad on a more general level, I turned to the workof Edward A. Shils and Morris Janowitz. Producedalmost immediately after the war, “Cohesion andDisintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II,”provides a concise analysis of the sociological factorsbehind the continued resistance of the GermanArmy even after its eventual defeat became obvious.Although primarily a sociological study, Shils andJanowitz’s work still proves useful because it highlightsthe significant influence of personal motivations onthe average German soldier’s willingness to continuefighting even in the face of defeat. That trend impliesthat a desire to protect hearth and home rather thanan overwhelming belief in the justice of the Nazi causemotivated the soldiers of the Third Reich. Somewhatparadoxically, the average German soldier believedhe faced better odds of survival through continuedresistance than by surrendering to the Soviet Army.Propaganda represented a key avenue in disseminatingthe Nazi philosophy. Any consideration of Nazipropaganda must start with German PropagandaMinister Josef Goebbels. Universally considered amaster of his trade, Goebbels, more than anyone else,shaped the image that Nazi Germany presented to itscitizens and the world. A partial section of his diaryrecovered by Americans in Berlin in the final days ofthe war provides unique insight into the goals andintended result of the German propaganda effort. 16Unfortunately, I do not have access to the originalmanuscript, but Leonard W. Doob does a fine job ofdistilling the document down to its salient points,which he identifies as a series of recurring principlesin his, “Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda.” Analysisof these principles and their intended targets indicatesthat the Nazi government deliberately vilified theSoviet Army in order to build fear within the Germanpopulation, thereby encouraging the Nazi Army togreater efforts.4016Leonard W. Doob, “Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda,” The Public Opinion Quarterly 14, no. 3 (1950), 419.

Julius Yourman’s article, “Propaganda Techniques WithinNazi Germany,” serves as an interesting counterpoint toGoebbels perspective. Published at the beginning of thewar, it analyzes the primary methods employed by theGerman propaganda ministry and their effectivenessfrom the Allied point of view. Yourman pays particularattention to both the characterization of the Sovietsand the behavior cultivated among German women, sothe article is uniquely suited to my purposes while stillfalling in line with similar analyses. Like Goebbels’ diary,Yourman’s article points towards a deliberate effort tobuild fear of Soviet excesses among the female populationof Germany.Ruth Harris explores the legacy of the propagandaefforts during World War I, especially in regards tothe international perception of rape in “The Child ofthe Barbarian” Rape, Race and Nationalism in Franceduring the First World War.” In describing the Russiansduring World War II, the Germans co-opted manyof the techniques and characterizations pioneered bythe French and used to describe the Germans duringWorld War I. The fact that the destruction and massrape the French warned their citizens about actuallycame to pass only added further credence to the laterGerman warnings about the Russians.The traditional international acceptance of widespreadrape as part of military victory precluded any Germanassumptions of restraint on the part of the Russiansdue to fear of retribution. Roland Littlewood addressesthis issue from an anthropological perspective in hisarticle, “Military Rape,” while Theodor Meron’s, “Rapeas a Crime Under International Humanitarian Law,”applies a more historical approach. No matter whichangle one chooses, the evidence clearly suggests thatdefeated peoples expect to suffer large scale rape atthe hands of the victors. For the overly race consciousGerman people, few prospects represented as horrifyinga possibility as the contamination of “pure” Aryan bloodas a result of interbreeding with the Slavic race.Continuing in the vein of propaganda as it relatesto rape during wartime, I next turned my attentionto Susan Jeffords’, “Rape and the New World Order.”Although not directly related to World War II, the casestudy of the United States’ rescue of Kuwait duringthe First Gulf War contains interesting assertionsabout the political and military benefits of describingthe enemy as rapists. The study illustrates theeffectiveness of government propaganda on shapingthe subject population’s perceptions of the war. Thecharacterization of the enemy, namely the Soviets, asrapists not only solidified German support behindthe government’s decision to break the Nazi-SovietNon-Aggression Pact, but it also played on the alreadyexisting perception of the Soviet Union as a nation fullof barbarians.In more general terms, Rachel Bridges Whaley identifiesa striking relationship between equality and rape withina society. According to Whaley, societies in which womenare gaining equality with men experience a sharp increasein the number of rapes that occur. Although primarily asociological and not historical argument, the principle hasinteresting implications when applied to Nazi Germanyand Soviet Russia. The equality inherent to communismmay have resulted in an increased occurrence ofrape within Russia, thereby lending credence to Nazidepictions of the Soviets Army as barbarians intent onraping German women. In contrast, women probably didnot have to really worry about rape in ultra-masculineGerman society. Since most rapists draw motivationfrom a desire to establish power and dominance over thevictim, the already dominant German males had little togain from its perpetration under the Nazi social structure.Lynda Lytle Holmstrom and Ann Wolbert Burgessproduced yet another sociological argument withinteresting implications for Nazi Germany. Based onconclusions derived from a case study analyzing thereactions of husbands and boyfriends of rape victims,their article suggests that men often view rape asan attack against themselves and their masculinity.Applied to the situation in Nazi Germany, thatconclusion merely underscores the already prevalentimpulse of German men to protect German women.Soviet encroachment not only threatened womendirectly then, but also struck at the masculine identityof German men. This perceived personal affront morethan likely contributed to the excess brutality theNazis employed against the Russians as they sought toreassert their dominance and masculinity.41

Two authors provide helpful analyses of the post-warera in Germany. The first, Atina Grossmann, addressesthe widespread rape of German women by the Russianoccupying force. The threat highlighted by the Nazipropaganda actually came to pass, not least becausethe stubborn defense by the German Army, evenafter defeat became inevitable, provoked the Russiansto increased brutality. Undoubtedly, the continuedpersonnel losses suffered by the Soviets when the Nazisclearly lacked the ability to win, combined with themillions already lost during the brutal fighting alongthe Eastern Front, produced a desire for retaliation andretribution among the Soviets that they embraced fully.Fear encouraged the Nazis to previously unknownlevels of brutality and the resulting Soviet anger onlyupped the ante further.The second author, Elizabeth Heineman, argues that theovertly masculine and militaristic image of Nazi Germanyresulted in a postwar backlash and the development ofa distinctly female conceptualization of West Germany.The argument for a more feminine post-war Germanyonly emphasizes the role that male behavioral attitudesplayed during the war years. The limitation of womento domestic roles prevented their effective militarymobilization, but even more importantly, it limited theirintroduction into the civilian workforce. Germany simplydid not have enough manpower to both field an army andrun the industry to supply it, yet the rigid Nazi genderroles fatally hindered the implementation of the obvioussolution—women workers.However, women in Germany played more roles thanjust that of victim or mother. D’Ann Campbell, one ofthe foremost authorities on the combat experiences ofAmerican women, expands her scope beyond her usualare of expertise in, “Women in Combat: The World War IIExperience in the United States, Great Britain, Germanyand the Soviet Union.” Although somewhat predictablyoverbalanced towards the American and Britishexperience, her study nevertheless highlights the strikingcontrast between the minimal direct contributionsGerman women made to the war effort as comparedto their American, British and Russian counterparts.Campbell helpfully couches the German reluctanceto use women in combat in terms of the perceived“unnaturalness” of female Russian combatants. 17The Nazi government apparently paid little attentionto the Western Allies’ experiments with women in themilitary, but focused instead on the Slavic practices. True,the Soviets alone used women in frontline combat, butthe United States and Great Britain still greatly expandedthe accepted roles of women which one would expect theNazi government to address. Instead, the almost singularfocus on the Soviet efforts suggests both a preoccupationwith the Slavic nation and a correspondingly disdainfulperception of their society.The eventual use of German women in even limitedmilitary roles stems in large part from the efforts ofMinister of War Albert Speer. Only when the war turnedsouth for the Nazis and Speer assumed the role ofeconomic czar did Germany finally make an appreciableeffort to fully harness the power of its female population.Given that fact, any study of German women in WorldWar II must include an analysis of Speer and his policies.For that purpose, I consulted David Edgar’s Albert Speer.More practical than the majority of his compatriots,Speer sought to solve the critical manpower shortage byincorporating women wherever possible. The ingrainedGerman preconception of women as people needingprotection limited the effectiveness of all of the Germanmeasures, however. While military necessity eventuallymade the Nazis intellectually accept the idea of women innon-traditional roles, male chauvinism prevented themfrom embracing the change.Approaching the subject of women in combat from adifferent perspective, George H. Quester addresses theunderlying reasoning behind excluding women frommilitary service. Analyzing the performance of womenin various military capacities throughout history andaround the world, he concludes that objections based oncapability and performance remain unsubstantiated. Heidentifies the only real limiting factor as the perceivedimmorality of the move by the majority of societies. Thisfalls perfectly in line with Nazi Germany’s treatment ofwomen in the military during World War II, especiallyas they compared to the barbaric Soviet example. Tothe Nazis, Germany’s refusal to resort to the large scaleemployment of women in military capacities onlyfurther illustrated their beliefs about the superiority ofthe Aryan race.4217D’Ann Campbell, “Women in Combat: The World War II Experience in the United States, Great Britain, Germany and the Soviet Union,”The Journal of Military History 57, no. 2 (1993), 316.

With such a wide range of component sources, therisk lies less with not having enough information as itdoes with having too much. In order to avoid gettinglost within any one component, I plan to maintain afairly strict balance in terms of the number of sourcesfor each supporting topic. Additionally, the success ofmy thesis depends on the interweaving of the varioussupporting components into one cohesive argument,so I will avoid addressing each topic separately and insequential order. The final product will blend all of myresearch into one argument with the expectation thatthe reader will never know that it developed from fourdistinct historiographies. Hopefully my efforts will serveas the starting point that I lacked for future historiansconsidering the link between racial and gender policies inNazi Germany.Works CitedCampbell, D’Ann. “Women in Combat: The World War IIExperience in the United States, Great Britain, Germany,and the Soviet Union.” The Journal of Military History 57,no. 2 (1993): 301-323.Doob, Leonard W. “Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda.”The Public Opinion Quarterly 14, no. 3 (1950): 419-442.Fischer, George. “Vlasov & Hitler.” The Journal of ModernHistory 23, no. 1 (1951): 58.BibliographyBock, Gisela. “Racism and Sexism in Nazi Germany:Motherhood, Compulsory Sterilization, and the State.”Signs 8, no. 3 (1983): 400-421.Bridges Whaley, Rachel. “The Paradoxical Relationshipbetween Gender Inequality and Rape: Toward a RefinedTheory.” Gender and Society 15, no. 4 (2001): 531-555.Campbell, D’Ann. “Women in Combat: The World War IIExperience in the United States, Great Britain, Germany,and the Soviet Union.” The Journal of Military History 57,no. 2 (1993): 301-323.Doob, Leonard W. “Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda.”The Public Opinion Quarterly 14, no. 3 (1950): 419-442.Edgar, David. Albert Speer (New York: TheatreCommunications Group, Inc.), 2001.Evans, Richard J. “German Social Democracy andWomen’s Suffrage 1891-1918.” Journal of ContemporaryHistory 15, no. 3 (1980): 533-557.Fischer, George. “Vlasov & Hitler.” The Journal of ModernHistory 23, no. 1 (1951): 58.Grossmann, Atina. “A Question of Silence: The Rape ofGerman Women by Occupation Soldiers.” October 72(Spring 1995): 43-63.Harris, Ruth. “The Child of the Barbarian’: Rape, Raceand Nationalism in France during the First World War.”Past and Present, no. 141 (1993): 170-206.Heineman, Elizabeth. “The Hour of the Woman:Memories of Germany’s Crisis Years’ and West GermanNational Identity.” The American Historical Review 101,no. 2 (1996): 354-395.Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf translated by RalphManheim (Boston: Mariner Books), 1999.Holmstrom, Lynda Lytle and Ann Wolbert Burgess.“Rape: The Husband’s and Boyfriend’s InitialReactions.” The Family Coordinator 28, no. 3 (1979):321-330.Jeffords, Susan. “Rape and the New World Order.”Cultural Critique, no. 19 (1991): 203-215.Koch, H. W. “Hitler’s Programme and the Genesis ofOperation Barbarossa.” The Historical Journal 26, no. 4(1983): 891-920.Littlewood, Roland. “Military Rape.” AnthropologyToday 13, no. 2 (1997): 7-16.Meron, Theodor. “Rape as a Crime Under InternationalHumanitarian Law.” The American Journal ofInternational Law 87, no. 3 (1993): 424-428.Quester, George H. “Women in Combat.” InternationalSecurity 1, no. 4 (1977): 80-91.Shils, Edward A. and Morris Janowitz. “Cohesion andDisintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II.” ThePublic Opinion Quarterly 12, no. 2 (1948): 280-315.Yourman, Julius. “Propaganda Techniques Within NaziGermany.” Journal of Educational Sociology 13, no. 3(1939): 148-163.43

Norwich University | College of Graduate and Continuing Studies | 158 Harmon Drive Northfield, Vermont 05663-0367Tel: 1-800-460-5597 ext. 3372 or +1-647-722-6642 ext. 3372mmh@online.norwich.edu | online.norwich.edu19223_NU_MMH_Survival Guide_11 26 2012