Western Civilization
GUIDELINES FOR THEMATIC ESSAYS (Final Essay)
The goal of this essay is to look at how three different sources tell the story of the same era,
event, or person. You will find 3 primary sources that cover one of the aforementioned items and
compare/contrast how the story is told. The primary sources you choose have to have been
created between the years 1550-present. You MAY NOT use any of the sources from
our discussions. You MAY NOT use American history unless it involves its involvement
with other parts of the Western world. (For example, European colonialization in North
America.)
1. You will choose a topic we have covered in class:
a. State building and power
b. The Enlightenment
c. Global Commerce
d. The Enlightenment
e. Revolutions
f. Nationalism
g. New Imperialism
h. The World Wars & Interwar Years
i. The world from 1945-Present
2. You will choose an event, person, or even era within these topics. For example,
you may choose Marie Antoinette and see what sources are written about her.
3. You will find primary sources based on this topic. Make sure your topic is broad
enough where you can have 3 sources, but not so broad that it is too big to cover.
For this reason, you may want to make a list of top 3 topics you’d like to cover.
4. You will want to compare what these sources have in common. What facts and
opinions do they share? For example, do all three of your sources on Marie
Antoinette say she was smart but naive? Make note of this.
5. You will want to then note the differences in the sources. Does one source, for
example, see her as heartless? Does another see her as a careless woman but a
good mother? What are the differences?
6. Then, you will want to analyze why there may be differences and which ones
might be more reliable. For this reason, you will want to research the authors as
much as possible. Was the author who said she was heartless a Parisian mother
who didn’t have money to feed her kids, but never actually met the queen? Was
the person who said she was a good mother someone who knew her intimately?
Did the Cardinal de Rohan write a source on her? (He was quite taken by Marie,
so he may write a more florid account).
7. What can you conclude about the selection of sources and how history is written
just by analyzing these primary sources?
ESSAY COMPONENTS
Essay Title
Be creative. An interesting title captures the attention of your audience and gives readers a
clear idea of the subject of your essay.
Introduction to Subject
Here’s where good research pays off. This may seem counter-intuitive, but please use one
secondary source to describe the basics of your topic. The introduction should be brief, but it
should also give the following details:
•
•
•
Give the who, what, where, when, how, and why of the topic which you are studying
Identify your sources: Give the titles, authors, and date of publication
Identify your thesis: Yes, even though you are analyzing sources, you still want a
thesis. It should be something you observed, analyzed, or discovered while looking at
these source.
o Improper thesis: I am going to tell you about 3 sources on Marie Antoinette
o Proper thesis: Marie Antoinette was a controversial figure whose biographies tend to be
written very passionately about her: some of her biographers want to save her name while
others want to tarnish it.
References
This is an alphabetized list of references that contributed to your sketch. Please divide the list
into two categories (primary sources and secondary sources) and use the MLA, APA, of
Chicago style reference style.
Credits
Here’s where you take credit for your essay. Please use this format: “Prepared by: Firstname
Lastname.”
• MLA, APA, and Chicago require cover pages with your name on front. Please ignore
this. I am requiring you place your name on back.
• Subsequently, if you use MLA, you are typically required to use your last name as a
header. Please do not do this, either. Make your header a shortened version of your
title.
Formatting:
•
•
1-inch margins, 12-sized font, Times New Roman
o (Points will be deducted if these specifications are not met)
4-5 pages
•
Include both in-text citations AND a reference page: one without the other is plagiarism
and you may receive the fullest penalty depending on the situation
RESEARCH SUPPORT:
• If you make an appointment with the Writing Center AT LEAST one week before the
due date and go to you appointment, you will get a 2-day extension on your paper. Proof
is required of appointment made and completed.
• If you use a text from the library OR the library’s online database, you will receive 5
points extra credit. Proof is require of use beyond reference page citation. (Easiest way is
to just bring me the article or show me your ticket from the circulation desk.
RESEARCH:
Choose one of the primary source websites to find your source:
www.eyewitnesstohistory.com
http://www.historians.org/teaching/aahe/kelly/pew/Science.htm
http://primary-sources.eui.eu/
http://eudocs.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Main_Page
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/coldwar.htm
http://millercenter.org/academic/dgs/primaryresources/cold_war
http://guides.lib.washington.edu/content.php?pid=90255&sid=687755
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/
MILESTONES:
Thursday, April 6th 2017 (Thursday): Choose a topic and place it on Google Docs
Thursday, April 13th 2017 (Thursday): Give me the reference line of 2 primary sources.
Friday, April 21st (Friday): Final paper due by 11:59PM via Safe Assign
CECIL JOHN RHOADES
Great Imperialist, Monster, or Man of His Time
Rhoades 1
“Rhodes was the ultimate imperialist, he believed, above all else, in the glory of the
British Empire and the superiority of the Englishman and British Rule, and saw it as his God
given task to expand the Empire, not only for the good of that Empire, but, as he believed, for the
good of all peoples over whom she would rule” ("Cecil John Rhodes."). According to Rhodes,
“Africa is still lying ready for us it is our duty to take it” (Rhodes). This essay takes a look
“Confession of Faith by Cecil Rhodes 1877.” by Cecil Rhodes, two letters Olive Schreiner to
Havelock Ellis, 19 March 1890 and Olive Schreiner to John X. Merriman, 3 April 1897, by Olive
Schreiner and The Memoirs of Paul Kruger, by Paul Kruger in 1902. Cecil John Rhodes was a
living legend of British Imperialism, whom he himself convince it was his duty and destiny to
spread the British Empire at all cost, where others had a respect for Rhodes it changed as his
actions merited a dire rethinking.
Cecil Rhodes is very clear with how the world should be and how one should go about
making it that way. “It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we
should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes that more territory simply means more of the
Anglo-Saxon race more of the best the most human, most honourable race the world possesses”
(Rhodes). Paul Kruger, president of Transvaal, is introduced to how Rhodes does business from
his first interaction with Rhodes. In the early 1880’s Rhodes and Kruger meet as Rhodes wants
to recruit Kruger into his dream of the African super colony for the British. Kruger recalled
Rhodes saying, ““We must work together. I know the Republic wants a seaport: you must have
Delagoa Bay.” Kruger replied: “How can we work together there? The harbor belongs to the
Portuguese, and they won’t hand it over.” “Then we must simply take it,” said Rhodes” (Kruger
193). Kruger bristles at this and wants no part and Rhodes ends all attempts at further
recruitment. Olive Schreiner on the other hand is quite taken by the perception of Rhodes. “I am
Rhoades 2
going to meet Cecil Rhodes the only great man & man of genius S. Africa possesses” (Schreiner,
1890, 34-35).
Cecil Rhodes fully believes that Africa and anywhere else must come under British rule
by right of birth. “I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world
we inhabit the better it is for the human race. Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited
by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they
were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country
added to our dominions gives” (Rhodes). Rhodes slaughtered the people of Africa to further his
desires. “With the permission to engage in defensive action from the British Government Rhodes
joined Jameson in Matabeleland and his group of mercenary soldiers struck a quick and fatal
blow at the Ndebele. Rhodes’ mercenaries were in possession of the latest in munitions
technology, carrying with them into the veld maxim guns, which, like machine guns, could fire
rapid rounds. The Ndebele Impis were helpless in the face of this brutal killing technology and
were slaughtered in their thousands” ("Cecil John Rhodes."). Paul Kruger had no disillusion on
who or what Rhodes was. Kruger stated, “Cecil Rhodes is the man who bore by far the most
prominent part in the disaster that struck the country. In spite of the high eulogiums passed upon
him by his friends, he was one of the most unscrupulous characters that have ever existed. The
Jesuitical maxim that “the end justifies the means” formed his only political creed” (Kruger 192).
Olive Schreiner no longer held her idealistic view of Rhodes and realized what he was all about.
“But after all - the old sorrow comes back again. We fight Rhodes because he means so much of
oppression, injustice, & moral degradation to South Africa” (Schreiner, 1897, 58-60).
Cecil Rhodes was hell bent to make his vision a reality and in his mind is what’s best for
the world as a whole. He will not be persuaded otherwise that the best person is a British person,
Rhoades 3
so with his fanatic tendencies is not the best to rely upon. Rhodes states, “Fancy Australia
discovered and colonised under the French flag, what would it mean merely several millions of
English unborn that at present exist we learn from the past and to form our future. We learn from
having lost to cling to what we possess. We know the size of the world we know the total extent”
(Rhodes). Rhodes has totally bought into not only are Anglo-Saxon the premium race but must
also be British or you are held at a disadvantage. With regards to Paul Kruger and his The
Memoirs of Paul Kruger, have to take a step back because it is a self-biography and really try to
see is this the truth or is this how you want others to see you. When you write about yourself it is
too easy to make you look good. In his opening Kruger states that his parents were against
slavery and because of this, “But they refused to continue to live under such unjust masters”
(Kruger 4). Was this really the case or could his parents no longer make ends meet at the Cape
Colony and were forced to head elsewhere. One sounds really just and very forward thinking for
the 1830’s in South Africa. Looking at other sources of the time though most of what Kruger
says can be substantiated. Rhodes “often disagreed with the Transvaal government's policies and
felt he could use his money and his power to overthrow the Boer government and install a British
colonial government supporting mine-owners' interests in its place. In 1895, Rhodes precipitated
his own spectacular fall from power when he supported an attack on the Transvaal under the
leadership of his old friend, Leander Jameson. It was a complete failure and Rhodes had to resign
as Prime Minister of the Cape and head of the British South Africa Company in January 1896”
("Cecil John Rhodes."). This downfall for Rhodes was directly against Kruger in which he
recalls the incident in great detail in The Memoirs of Paul Kruger pages 228-243. Though you
might again call in doubt how easy he decided to be to the peoples of Johannesburg that rebelled
against Transvaal. He stated that troops going to root out the rebels in Johannesburg called out to
Rhoades 4
him saying, ““President, we have come to greet you, and at the same time to inform you that,
when we have captured Jameson, we intend to march straight on to Johannesburg and to shoot
down that den with all the rebels in it. They have provoked us long enough.” I replied: “No,
brother, you must not speak like that. Remember, there are thousands of innocent and loyal
people at Johannesburg, and the others have been for the most part misled. We must not be
vengeful; what would be the result of such a step”” (Kruger 240)? Again this comes off as very
forgiving for someone who had a revolt against his rule in 1895. Olive Schreiner’s letters give
off a more sincere look at what was happening at the time. These are just letters to the people she
knew, she wasn’t trying to make an ideal realized and she wasn’t writing a memoir and thinking
about how the world would see her. Olive’s observation about that state of the British Empire is
most telling. “But if he (Rhodes) passed away tomorrow there still remains the terrible fact that
something in our society has formed the matrix which has fed, nourished, & built up such a
man! It is the far future of Africa during the next twenty-five or fifty years which depresses me”
Schreiner, 1897, 60-64). Olive realizes that Rhodes is not the only problem, that the way the
British are so into Imperialism it leads to the monster that Rhodes had become, allowed him to
flourish and they praised him for what he did. Rhodes was practically Hitler before Hitler.
Though Hitler doesn’t have a statue and a scholarship in his name. In fact I could see them
being great friends if they could get over one being a Brit and one being only Austrian.
History is written in the perspective that best suits those in power at the time. It is only
with time and diligence that one can try and gain a true sense of what went on. You must also
take into account where you are. Reading about Cecil Rhodes in England is most likely different
then reading about him in South Africa. For these events to happen so recently allows us to find
different viewpoints. Had the events happened 500 years ago how many different sources could
you find or be allowed to find that had not been destroyed. Looking over these sources I think
Rhoades 5
that now day England wouldn’t want too many people reading Rhodes will. That there was a
time in your history that a white supremacist was lauded and held up as an example merely a
120 years ago needs to be smoothed over. However with the existence of the memoirs and letters
they cannot control the story of Rhodes and it allows for a more legitimate history to be written.
I say more legitimate because unless you were there you cannot be for sure what happened 100
percent. As I think of when this paper is due, December 7th, the 75th anniversary of the attack on
Pearl Harbor, look in a Japanese history book and what will you actually see about that event.
History will always be changed to better fit what the country wants history to say.
Rhoades 6
References
"Cecil John Rhodes." South African History Online. South African History Online, 1 Oct. 2011.
Web. 05 Dec. 2016.
Olive Schreiner to Havelock Ellis, 19 March 1890, Harry Ransom Research Center, University
of Texas at Austin, Olive Schreiner Letters Project transcription.
Accessed December 5, 2016.
https://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=collections&colid=18&letterid=300
Olive Schreiner to John X. Merriman, 3 April 1897, NLSA Cape Town,
Special Collections, Olive Schreiner Letters Project transcription.
Accessed November 21, 2016.
https://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=collections&colid=51&letterid=9
Kruger, Paul. The Memoirs of Paul Kruger. Toronto 1902.
Archive.org. Accessed December 5, 2016
https://archive.org/details/memoirsofpaulkru00kruguoft
Rhodes, Cecil. “Confession of Faith by Cecil Rhodes 1877.”
pages.uoregon.edu. Accessed November 21, 2016.
http://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/Rhodes-Confession.htm
Prepared by: Name here
CECIL JOHN RHOADES
Great Imperialist, Monster, or Man of His Time
Rhoades 1
“Rhodes was the ultimate imperialist, he believed, above all else, in the glory of the
British Empire and the superiority of the Englishman and British Rule, and saw it as his God
given task to expand the Empire, not only for the good of that Empire, but, as he believed, for the
good of all peoples over whom she would rule” ("Cecil John Rhodes."). According to Rhodes,
“Africa is still lying ready for us it is our duty to take it” (Rhodes). This essay takes a look
“Confession of Faith by Cecil Rhodes 1877.” by Cecil Rhodes, two letters Olive Schreiner to
Havelock Ellis, 19 March 1890 and Olive Schreiner to John X. Merriman, 3 April 1897, by Olive
Schreiner and The Memoirs of Paul Kruger, by Paul Kruger in 1902. Cecil John Rhodes was a
living legend of British Imperialism, whom he himself convince it was his duty and destiny to
spread the British Empire at all cost, where others had a respect for Rhodes it changed as his
actions merited a dire rethinking.
Cecil Rhodes is very clear with how the world should be and how one should go about
making it that way. “It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we
should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes that more territory simply means more of the
Anglo-Saxon race more of the best the most human, most honourable race the world possesses”
(Rhodes). Paul Kruger, president of Transvaal, is introduced to how Rhodes does business from
his first interaction with Rhodes. In the early 1880’s Rhodes and Kruger meet as Rhodes wants
to recruit Kruger into his dream of the African super colony for the British. Kruger recalled
Rhodes saying, ““We must work together. I know the Republic wants a seaport: you must have
Delagoa Bay.” Kruger replied: “How can we work together there? The harbor belongs to the
Portuguese, and they won’t hand it over.” “Then we must simply take it,” said Rhodes” (Kruger
193). Kruger bristles at this and wants no part and Rhodes ends all attempts at further
recruitment. Olive Schreiner on the other hand is quite taken by the perception of Rhodes. “I am
Rhoades 2
going to meet Cecil Rhodes the only great man & man of genius S. Africa possesses” (Schreiner,
1890, 34-35).
Cecil Rhodes fully believes that Africa and anywhere else must come under British rule
by right of birth. “I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world
we inhabit the better it is for the human race. Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited
by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they
were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country
added to our dominions gives” (Rhodes). Rhodes slaughtered the people of Africa to further his
desires. “With the permission to engage in defensive action from the British Government Rhodes
joined Jameson in Matabeleland and his group of mercenary soldiers struck a quick and fatal
blow at the Ndebele. Rhodes’ mercenaries were in possession of the latest in munitions
technology, carrying with them into the veld maxim guns, which, like machine guns, could fire
rapid rounds. The Ndebele Impis were helpless in the face of this brutal killing technology and
were slaughtered in their thousands” ("Cecil John Rhodes."). Paul Kruger had no disillusion on
who or what Rhodes was. Kruger stated, “Cecil Rhodes is the man who bore by far the most
prominent part in the disaster that struck the country. In spite of the high eulogiums passed upon
him by his friends, he was one of the most unscrupulous characters that have ever existed. The
Jesuitical maxim that “the end justifies the means” formed his only political creed” (Kruger 192).
Olive Schreiner no longer held her idealistic view of Rhodes and realized what he was all about.
“But after all - the old sorrow comes back again. We fight Rhodes because he means so much of
oppression, injustice, & moral degradation to South Africa” (Schreiner, 1897, 58-60).
Cecil Rhodes was hell bent to make his vision a reality and in his mind is what’s best for
the world as a whole. He will not be persuaded otherwise that the best person is a British person,
Rhoades 3
so with his fanatic tendencies is not the best to rely upon. Rhodes states, “Fancy Australia
discovered and colonised under the French flag, what would it mean merely several millions of
English unborn that at present exist we learn from the past and to form our future. We learn from
having lost to cling to what we possess. We know the size of the world we know the total extent”
(Rhodes). Rhodes has totally bought into not only are Anglo-Saxon the premium race but must
also be British or you are held at a disadvantage. With regards to Paul Kruger and his The
Memoirs of Paul Kruger, have to take a step back because it is a self-biography and really try to
see is this the truth or is this how you want others to see you. When you write about yourself it is
too easy to make you look good. In his opening Kruger states that his parents were against
slavery and because of this, “But they refused to continue to live under such unjust masters”
(Kruger 4). Was this really the case or could his parents no longer make ends meet at the Cape
Colony and were forced to head elsewhere. One sounds really just and very forward thinking for
the 1830’s in South Africa. Looking at other sources of the time though most of what Kruger
says can be substantiated. Rhodes “often disagreed with the Transvaal government's policies and
felt he could use his money and his power to overthrow the Boer government and install a British
colonial government supporting mine-owners' interests in its place. In 1895, Rhodes precipitated
his own spectacular fall from power when he supported an attack on the Transvaal under the
leadership of his old friend, Leander Jameson. It was a complete failure and Rhodes had to resign
as Prime Minister of the Cape and head of the British South Africa Company in January 1896”
("Cecil John Rhodes."). This downfall for Rhodes was directly against Kruger in which he
recalls the incident in great detail in The Memoirs of Paul Kruger pages 228-243. Though you
might again call in doubt how easy he decided to be to the peoples of Johannesburg that rebelled
against Transvaal. He stated that troops going to root out the rebels in Johannesburg called out to
Rhoades 4
him saying, ““President, we have come to greet you, and at the same time to inform you that,
when we have captured Jameson, we intend to march straight on to Johannesburg and to shoot
down that den with all the rebels in it. They have provoked us long enough.” I replied: “No,
brother, you must not speak like that. Remember, there are thousands of innocent and loyal
people at Johannesburg, and the others have been for the most part misled. We must not be
vengeful; what would be the result of such a step”” (Kruger 240)? Again this comes off as very
forgiving for someone who had a revolt against his rule in 1895. Olive Schreiner’s letters give
off a more sincere look at what was happening at the time. These are just letters to the people she
knew, she wasn’t trying to make an ideal realized and she wasn’t writing a memoir and thinking
about how the world would see her. Olive’s observation about that state of the British Empire is
most telling. “But if he (Rhodes) passed away tomorrow there still remains the terrible fact that
something in our society has formed the matrix which has fed, nourished, & built up such a
man! It is the far future of Africa during the next twenty-five or fifty years which depresses me”
Schreiner, 1897, 60-64). Olive realizes that Rhodes is not the only problem, that the way the
British are so into Imperialism it leads to the monster that Rhodes had become, allowed him to
flourish and they praised him for what he did. Rhodes was practically Hitler before Hitler.
Though Hitler doesn’t have a statue and a scholarship in his name. In fact I could see them
being great friends if they could get over one being a Brit and one being only Austrian.
History is written in the perspective that best suits those in power at the time. It is only
with time and diligence that one can try and gain a true sense of what went on. You must also
take into account where you are. Reading about Cecil Rhodes in England is most likely different
then reading about him in South Africa. For these events to happen so recently allows us to find
different viewpoints. Had the events happened 500 years ago how many different sources could
you find or be allowed to find that had not been destroyed. Looking over these sources I think
Rhoades 5
that now day England wouldn’t want too many people reading Rhodes will. That there was a
time in your history that a white supremacist was lauded and held up as an example merely a
120 years ago needs to be smoothed over. However with the existence of the memoirs and letters
they cannot control the story of Rhodes and it allows for a more legitimate history to be written.
I say more legitimate because unless you were there you cannot be for sure what happened 100
percent. As I think of when this paper is due, December 7th, the 75th anniversary of the attack on
Pearl Harbor, look in a Japanese history book and what will you actually see about that event.
History will always be changed to better fit what the country wants history to say.
Rhoades 6
References
"Cecil John Rhodes." South African History Online. South African History Online, 1 Oct. 2011.
Web. 05 Dec. 2016.
Olive Schreiner to Havelock Ellis, 19 March 1890, Harry Ransom Research Center, University
of Texas at Austin, Olive Schreiner Letters Project transcription.
Accessed December 5, 2016.
https://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=collections&colid=18&letterid=300
Olive Schreiner to John X. Merriman, 3 April 1897, NLSA Cape Town,
Special Collections, Olive Schreiner Letters Project transcription.
Accessed November 21, 2016.
https://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=collections&colid=51&letterid=9
Kruger, Paul. The Memoirs of Paul Kruger. Toronto 1902.
Archive.org. Accessed December 5, 2016
https://archive.org/details/memoirsofpaulkru00kruguoft
Rhodes, Cecil. “Confession of Faith by Cecil Rhodes 1877.”
pages.uoregon.edu. Accessed November 21, 2016.
http://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/Rhodes-Confession.htm
Prepared by: Name here
Purchase answer to see full
attachment