Judging Criteria for the History Prize

Undergraduate History Prize:
Submissions for the Undergraduate History Prize will generally be judged by the following criteria:

1.  The paper must have a clearly stated thesis or argument concerning a  historical topic.

2.  The body of the paper must evaluate and/or support the thesis in a consistent, logical, and entirely relevant manner.

3.  The body of the paper should cite, discuss and provide a context for evidence to support the thesis.  The evidence should include both

a.  Primary sources: this includes written sources and/or non-written shources (including oral, visual, artistic, archaeological, and statistical data) from as close to the time and place of the paper topic as possible;

b.  Secondary sources: this includes any later discussion and analysis of the topic or period, particularly recent scholarship on the topic.  The paper should show some familiarity with major recent interpretations of the topic, and should be able to demonstrate how its thesis is similar to, and different from, such interpretations.

4.  All of the evidence presented should be documented consistently using one of the major citation formats, which can be found in The MLA Handbook, The Chicago Manual of Style chapters 15-16, or Turabian's Manual for Writers.

5.  The paper should provide a conclusion that demonstrates that the thesis has been proven, and provides an indication of the significance of the result.

6.  The paper should be well written in correct English style, with minimal errors of word usage, spelling, syntax, and punctuation.
 

Graduate History Prize:
The criteria for judging the Graduate History Prize are identical to those for the Undergraduate History Prize, with the following additions and modifications:

1.  The paper should demonstrate a unique thesis or novel approach to the topic that distinguishes it from prior work published on the topic.

2.  The paper should discuss or make use of relevant primary evidence for the topic at hand, in a manner that shows extensive familiarity and a novel approach to the material.

3.  The paper should show familiarity with the major relevant modern scholarship on the topic.