Write commentaries on THE FIRST five of the following. NOT NUMBER 6 For each one, write up to one page. Answers will be
graded on quality not length. For each case, describe its context, its historical significance, and
comment on any questions of interpretation. Depending on the passage or image, you might want
to explain technical terms or allusions, pick out the political or literary aims of the author or maker,
write about how it relates to other available evidence, or just show what it contributes to our
understanding of the age. You should focus on explaining and interpreting: do not spend time
repeating or paraphrase the passage.
GUIDANCE ON WRITING COMMENTARIES
Rules of the examinations
This is an open-book exam, but you should answer in your own words. Do not collaborate with other students on the course or with anyone else. You are free to use textbooks and other academic publications, but do not use ChatGBT or similar AI. Violation of these rules, as well as any other academic dishonesty, is prohibited.
Late penalties. Exams received after noon on the due date will lose half the total score. Exams received after midnight on the due date will receive a zero.
How to write a good commentary
The aim of the exam is to test your understanding of materials discussed in the lectures and assigned as reading. I am particularly interested in finding out how good you are at thinking critically about the different kinds of written testimony and material evidence we have for this period. What problems does each source raise? what contexts help us use it? and what is its wider significance for understanding the Roman Republic
You will be asked in each examination to write commentaries on five of the ten provided. For each one, write up to one page. Answers will be graded on quality not length. For each case, describe its context, its historical significance, and comment on any questions of interpretation. Depending on the passage or image, you might want to explain technical terms or allusions, pick out the political or literary aims of the author or maker, write about how it relates to other available evidence, or just show what it contributes to our understanding of the age. You should focus on explaining and interpreting: do not waste time repeating or paraphrase the passage, and do not write a mini-narrative, even if one springs to mind when you see a piece.
You will have an opportunity to write in a different way for the final paper. But for this exercise I am interested in your skills as an historian in interpreting evidence.
PLease let me know if you have any questions
