Asgn 2: Assessment of Primary Documents
On the two separate Asgn 2 forms posted on D2L type your answers in single spacing, in Times New
Roman 10pt font, in blue. Keep forms to 1 pg each. Include your name and section # at the top. Upload
under the Assignments tab by the deadline indicated by email and/or on D2L. WARNING: Do not copy
others’ work; this will result in a zero for the assignment and likely a violation form sent to the dean.
Analyze and evaluate the two documents from the Roman Republic period assigned
from GE on pp. 145-49 and 153-55 (not the editor’s introductions, which are of course helpful
just as you may find pp. 134-35 a good background, rather the primary sources themselves
starting after “Questions to Consider”).
The exercise is asking you to think critically and ask intelligently about these as historical sources and
come to some meaningful conclusions. So you’re sifting these to see if/how/why or why not they are
helpful in knowing the past, in this case of Rome. You will find the Historical Sources guideline
provided earlier on D2L and discussed in class before the break as a good way to start (see esp. #1, 2, 5
on the backside). Note that mere summarization is neither analysis nor evaluation. See below in bold
for definitions of analyze and evaluate.
The two separate forms are for the two different primary document excerpts, from Livy and Cicero.
They provide a neat framework for analyzing and evaluating a primary historical source. I’ve posted
an example form that you may find useful. Btw, in the first excerpt on pp. 145-49 (from Livy), note
that Sextus Tarquin was a prince of the Etruscans, a people just to the north of the Latium region
(where Rome is) who had taken over as a foreign monarchy. The Romans at that time were subjects of
the Etruscan king.
The essential analysis and evaluation should be your own. Any critical information or analysis derived
from a secondary source must be properly credited (either parenthetical or footnote form is fine, but
with full information either way, including pg # if a printed work – if parenthetical form, provide a
Works Cited with the fuller information at the end).
Analyze: look into and think about carefully, questioning and posing answers
Evaluate: determine the value or quality of something (Think: How useful is this document for
considering the history of this or that? How so? To what extent is it helpful in knowing about
some specific past event[s]?)
These are possible approaches/phraseology when analysis or evaluation of documents is carried out, so
maybe think in these terms as you look carefully at the primary sources:
“[doc name] claims that…” or “The author of [doc name or type] appears to be/is someone
interested in trying to…”
“The goal of the author seems to be… He conveys this through the story/through lines such as…”
“From __________ it may be concluded* that __________” [*or supposed]
“This excerpt is useful in terms of…”
“…may be valuable as a source for _____ but perhaps not for _____”
“To determine how valuable this source really is we would need to have evidence that shows…”
CLARIFY WHY YOU ANSWER WITH THIS OR THAT OBSERVATION (this is where you want to refer to specifics
in the document, for example quoting short parts and citing the source and page).
