Description-

Each student is responsible for completing one, 2-3 page book reviews during the course of the

semester. The review should be double spaced, 550-750 words, in 12 pt., Times New Roman

font. Additionally, each review should summarize the scope, thesis, and content of the book as

well as any theoretical or methodological concerns present in the work. The review should also

be critical and include an analysis of how well the book highlights or resolves issues of

significance discussed in class.

(Other Considerations)

How to format your paper: • Must include your name, course number and section (single-spaced) in upper-left hand

corner on the first page of your review (no title page necessary) • 1-inch margins and the body of your review should be double-spaced, 12pt font • 2-3 complete pages in length • Please refer to the Chicago Manual of Style’s 16th Edition to guide any citations/footnotes

that you make in your review. Grammar and Syntax

• This is a formal piece of writing that requires correct English, grammar and punctuation. • Do not use profanity or slang and address authors and key figures by their full or last name. • Quoted material must include page numbers, e.g. “[Quoted material]” (Washington, pg. #). • Avoid quotes that are more than 3 lines long • PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD!!!

Grading “A” papers (60-54 pts): Adequately meet above requirements and contain few grammatical errors. “B/C” papers (53-42 pts): Meet most of the above requirements, but lack a complete analysis of the article and miss some formatting requirements. Will have grammatical errors that detract from the paper. Paper may have been late. “D” papers (41-36 pts): Paper did not fully address the assignment and above requirements. Paper includes numerous grammatical errors. Paper may have been late. “F” papers (35-0 pts): Haphazardly put together assignment or a paper that struggles to follow the assignment and make sense of the article. Paper is significantly late. Paper is plagiarized (0 pts).

NO OUTSIDE SOURCES SHOULD BE USED FOR THIS PAPER!!!

2

Article Review—HIST 1323

(Spring 2019)

Each book review should answer the following questions:

NOTE: Reviews should be in ESSAY format. The following paragraphs are a simple

breakdown of the key requirements for your reviews.

1. What is the scope, or subject, of the book? (10 points) [Generally speaking, the scope is presented as the lead sentence of the first paragraph in

your essay. In writing the book’s scope, please avoid generic statements. (For example:

Throughout the years, there have been many struggles to bring about African American

freedom.”) Always include a clear mention of the location (i.e., region) and time that the

event takes place

a. Example: i. Ludo De Witte examines the catastrophic series of events, state actors, and

foreign agents that ultimately led to and were responsible for the

assassination of Patrice Lumumba, the first popularly elected prime

minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in 1960.

2. What is the author’s thesis? (15 points) Simply put, the thesis is the author’s claim about the subject or topic (see Scope) under consideration.

a. Example: i. De Witte contends that the assassination of Patrice Lumumba occurred at

the behest and full logistical, military, and operational support of Belgium,

America, and the United Nations, who each colluded to bring about the

colonial re-conquest of this central African nation.

3. Discuss the author’s evidence at a critical level. (15 points) [Evaluate the primary and secondary sources used. Even though you may not be an “expert” discuss whether or not you believe the sources indicated enough depth of research by the

author to adequately discuss the subject matter.]

a. Example: i. De Witte employs historical analysis, the use of primary sources, to draw

on an array of evidence in support of his thesis. These sources include the

personal and official correspondence of Patrice Lumumba, the United

Nations, and the Belgian Parliament, diplomatic records, intelligence

service reports, newspaper accounts, diaries and memoirs of state officials,

and oral histories.

3

4. Does the evidence support the thesis? Why, or why not? (10 points) [Revisit the author’s thesis and discuss whether or not you believe the contents of the book/article adequately defended it (the thesis). If so, how? If not, why not?]

a. Example: i. Given the evidence that De Witte provides, it appears that Belgium,

America, and the United Nations are indisputably culpable for Lumumba’s

assassination. Brussels orchestrated Lumumba’s transfer to his enemies,

Moise Tshombe and Joseph D. Mobutu, in the Katanga province. From

that point forward, Lumumba’s death was a certainty. America’s role in

the political and military developments leading to the assassination of

Patrice Lumumba could not have been the result of Cold War politics, as

Krushchev felt that the Soviet Union had no immediate interests in the

Congo and believed that Lumumba’s imprisonment and murder played

into the hands of other African and Asian countries with communist

sympathies. Finally, the United Nations is equally culpable in bringing

about the murder of Patrice Lumumba. Under then UN Secretary General

Dag Hammaskjold, the international organization intentionally withheld

diplomatic protection from Lumumba during his attempt to reestablish

control of his government in November 1960.

5. Grammar and Punctuation (10 points) a. Please do not use colloquialisms. The use of first- and second-person pronouns

should be avoided completely (e.g., “I,” “we,” and “you.”

Total points possible = 60 points

**Sample Essay Follows**

4

Malachi D. Crawford

HIST 1323

Spring 2019

In his book The Assassination of Lumumba (2002), Ludo De Witte examines the

catastrophic series of events, state actors, and foreign agents that ultimately led to and were

responsible for the assassination of Patrice Lumumba, the first popularly elected prime minister

of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. De Witte contends that the assassination of Patrice

Lumumba occurred at the behest and full logistical, military, and operational support of Belgium,

America, and the United Nations, who each colluded to bring about the colonial re-conquest of

this central African nation. At the end of the day, none of the events then unfolding in the

summer and fall of 1960 could have come as a surprise to Lumumba or the people of the Congo.

At its core, The Assassination of Lumumba takes a fresh look at the fate of newly

independent African nation states during the mid-Twentieth Century, upending the traditional

narrative that locates the United States of America and its allies in Europe as champions of

democracy. In fact, De Witte draws on a range of sources in support of his thesis that the U.S.

and its allies at the United Nations were intimately involved in Lumumba’s overthrow and the

subsequent establishment of a neocolonial regime among the Congolese. The evidence includes

the personal and official correspondence of Patrice Lumumba, the United Nations and the

Belgian Parliament, diplomatic records, intelligence service reports, newspaper accounts, diaries

and memoirs of state officials, and oral histories.

Given the evidence that De Witte provides, it appears that Belgium, America, and the

United Nations are indisputably culpable for Lumumba’s assassination. Brussels orchestrated

Lumumba’s transfer to his enemies, Moise Tshombe and Joseph D. Mobutu, in the Katanga

province. From that point forward, Lumumba’s death was a certainty. America’s role in the

political and military developments leading to the assassination of Patrice Lumumba could not

have been the result of Cold War politics, as Krushchev felt that the Soviet Union had no

immediate interests in the Congo and believed that Lumumba’s imprisonment and murder played

into the hands of other African and Asian countries with communist sympathies. Finally, the

United Nations is equally culpable in bringing about the murder of Patrice Lumumba. Under

then UN Secretary General Dag Hammaskjold, the international organization intentionally

withheld diplomatic protection from Lumumba during his attempt to reestablish control of his

government in November 1960.

[Note: The remaining one to two paragraphs should discuss your take on the historical

significance of the work (article or book), how it relates to issues/history presented in class

lectures or your assigned readings, and any unresolved questions the author might take under

consideration in the future. Finally, this review is not double-spaced. Your review needs to be

double-spaced.]