REQUIREMENTS:
An appropriate introduction with the following:
Hook that engages reader’s attention
Transition from your hook to your argument with a sentence (or two) that explains why your hook is of interest. How does it tie into a larger theme in the text? How does it point us to a question worth asking?
Argument: State clearly what your paper is about. You can use the formal first person in this part of the introduction. For example, you might begin your argument sentence: “In this paper, I will argue…” or “In this paper, I will explore…”
Plan: Lay out a road map for your reader. Again, you can use the formal first person. Examples include: “I will first review…then I will explore…then I will discuss…” “I will first summarize…then I will use that evidence to argue…” Needless to say, your paper should then follow the road map that you lay out here.
An appropriate conclusion with the following:
First, include a brief (1-2 sentence) summary of the argument of your paper. Try to find a new way of phrasing your argument, to avoid repetitive language. Second, include a few broader hypotheses/suggestions based on the evidence you have considered in the paper. By this point, you have earned some credibility with your reader, who will therefore be ready to consider your suggestions about the broader implications of your work. You might also want to identify further questions worth exploring on this subject. You still want to avoid gross over-generalizations: no “throughout history” statements.
Substantial analysis of the sources that you use (the sources that I have provided). That analysis should (1) Give basic information on the sources you are using for the benefit of your reader, and (2) Assess the nature of these sources as evidence, and the questions we can (and cannot) ask of them. In other words, why do you think these sources can answer the questions you will ask of them?
An exploration of recurring themes throughout the different sources I provided as attachments, including:
The complex question of the appropriate use of force for religious purposes
The rich significance of holy sites and the desire to control them
What “just warfare” looks like, in terms of the behavior of participants
The nature of interfaith relations in this period
What an ideal political/military/religious leader looks like
An in-depth analysis of Saladin’s treatment of non-Muslims in the texts and how it’s potentially used to portray him as an ideal ruler. In engaging with the portrayal of Saladin, you MUST work meaningfully with the sources in the Francesco Gabrieli sourcebook, even if you use the other sources I gave you as well.
NOTE:
Only use information from the sources that I provided.
In your writing, include in-text citations from the sources (Chicago style).
The last source below (#6) is a large PDF, but you should only look at and use its pages that I have specified below in your writing.
Each PDF number below corresponds with the number in the file name of each PDF I have attached.
SOURCES:
PDF #1: The Crusades: A Reader, second edition, ed. S.J. Allen and Emilie Amt (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2014), pp. 5-12.
PDF #1: The Crusades: A Reader, ed. Allen and Amt, pp. 15-17
PDF #3: Muslim Sources of the Crusader Period: An Anthology, ed. James E. Lindsay and Suleiman A. Mourad (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2021), pp. 66-70
PDF #4: Muslim Sources of the Crusader Period: An Anthology, ed. Lindsay and Mourad, pp. 15-27
PDF #5: The Book of Contemplation, ed. Paul M. Cobb (London: Penguin, 2008), pp. 45-77, 143-154
PDF #6 Arab Historians of the Crusades, ed. Francesco Gabrieli (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984), pp. 87-113, 119-125, 139-146,160-175, 246-252
