My first DBQ on Euro... comments!

<p>2007 AP Free Response Questions Form B</p>

<p><a href=“College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools”>College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools;

<li>Describe and analyze concepts of nobility in France over the period from the late sixteenth century to the late eighteenth century.</li>
</ol>

<hr>

<p>My FIRST DBQ essay… hehe</p>

<hr>

<p>Nobility of France was simply wrong between late sixteenth century to late eighteenth century, and therefore, nothing so honorable resided behind the title. Looking back on earlier history of France, one can easily find brave and patriotic nobility with great swordmanship. As Pierre de La Primaudaye noted (Document 2), the “past” nobility was the true one to help out the France, not just the Lord. These nobilities, wherever they performed their honorable acts, distincted themselves. As in play *Don Juan<a href=“Document%208”>/I</a>, nobility’s act is the factor that made nobility. When they acted righteously, they sacrificed themselves for the good of the nation than selfish greed. Document 1 ended with rhetoric question that said, “But what feet, what heart, what purse, too, does one need/ To run, endure, and provide for this?” As I said previously, they endured the work to serve the king and people. Their work was rewarded by prestigious name and respect, not materialistic greed.
But we look at the nobility in the time period of the question. They were not the true nobility. They had the same title, yes, but their acts didn’t correspond to it (Document 3,12). Nobility no longer meant the great soldiers and patriots but just a title for ones with wealth. Thus, the truly honorable ones found no joy in their title because of other spoiled and wrong fake nobilities (Document 11). One of these furious swordsman named Henri stated (Document 4), “The prices of all judicial and financial offices have risen to excessive heights. There is no longer any reward for virtue, since all power now belongs to FAVORS, ALLIANCES, KINSHIPS, and MONEY.” Nobility was supposed to prevent this corruption in the nation but now it itself was polluted.
So, how did people come about to make sure that this wrong was “right”? They simply made up the rightness. King Louis XIII declared, “They [nobility] take pleasure in the death of a personal enemy, under the pretext of preserving their honors.” (Document 6) King’s sadness towards new nobility was evident. There were even some like Antoine de Montochrestian, who made up the land to call himself Baron of Vatteville (Document 5). To the new nobles, all they did was to create new titles. What they didn’t have came from money or influences (Document 7). Although the king sometimes appeared sad towards this corruption, the new title resulted from the king himself. Document 10 noted that the king gave title to people if they sacrifice blood or money. In other words, rich yet coward person could become nobility as other true one sacrificed his life to reach it.
Thus, this continuing difference prevented the occurrence of true soldiers, and even the ones with some dignities couldn’t be same as ones in the past. Gilles Andre de La Roque stated, “Someone who has recently received a noble title from the king may in time become a gentleman, but he can never be a member of this race of warriors, because he will always lack the ancient roots that it requires.”</p>

<h2> Simply, the French nobility in the late sixteenth century to the late eighteenth century was far inferior than nobility in past. Corruption from money and power obliterated the meaningful title of nobility, and as a result, the ancient nobility was lost. Although some acknowledged this wrongness,many, including the king, were mixed in this chaotic mistake to worsen it. All the sad and honest people could was recalling the honorable ones in the past (“He must transform himself in all things and fight his own desires./ This is the great ease of the court”; Document 1 showing code of true nobility in past)</h2>

<p>Noooo, tell me you didn’t pay for this.</p>

<p>I would suggest not using documents in the intro paragraph: this should focus on background information (time period) and your THESIS. Although your argument is solid, you need to make sure you analyze point of view in at least 3 documents, and that your essay is organized into at least 3 groups of documents. Ex: written by nobility themselves, written by religious leaders, written by commoners…</p>

<p>I did not see any point of view; your groupings may be implied if you got lucky with the graders, but I would try to make them much more explicit.</p>

<p>But as a first DBQ, job well done! My first DBQ paled in comparison with yours, and I got a 5. So you’re definitely in good shape. Good luck!</p>

<p>Oh nevermind, I thought you might be someone who didn’t trust their test score so was asking for people’s opinions on their free response.</p>

<p>Sorry.</p>

<p>And wow at your early preparation. I didn’t even know what DBQ’s were until December of Junior Year in APUSH, and then I didn’t want to know what they were.</p>

<p>Do not heed rb’s suggestion of not including documents in the intro. It is helpful, not necessary, to group your items (with numbers) in the introduction to give the reader an organize flow to read your essay.</p>

<p>Actually, my history teacher told me the same thing rb9109 said, no documents in the intro.</p>

<p>Yay, thanks for reading it. I wasn’t sure if anyone would bother to read this :-P.</p>

<p>I’ll remember not to use documents on intro. I was in rush (although I finished this in 35 minutes) that I wouldn’t be able to conclude it like I do in SAT so I put together ideas as I went. </p>

<p>My grouping was really general (good, losing definition of nobility, making up false stuffs, and leftover :-P). Your idea sounds good like by nobility, by commoners, etc… So, wait, I can just use some of the documents. Say… I pick 9/12. I do three paragraphs for body and put 3 documents on each of them (and perhaps add more ideas to it; this one was just combination of documents rather than analysis). I saw that the CB only mentioned, “use majority of documents” but I didn’t quite understand how many they meant by majority.</p>

<p>yeah, i second or third not using documents. Definitely make your groupings very clear, and you don’t have to put in parentheses which document your quote comes from. I would also suggest not using “we” or “I” in your essay (my teacher told us not to ). Your writing is very smooth, and you definately won 't have any problems with you DBQs.</p>

<p>Oh thanks.</p>

<p>Wait I’m confused then how do readers know which documents were grouped if I don’t cite them? Hmm.</p>

<p>because you’re already stating which documents they come from by stating who the author is before your quote. It saves you time by not putting the docs in parentheses, also if you quote which doc. its from, its rather redundant. </p>

<p>again, you have a great writing style, so don’t worry about it.i’m sure you’ll do great on the AP exam!</p>

<p>No, I would definitely cite the documents, graders skim over it and seeing (Document 2) in parentheses helps them. Otherwise how will they know by looking at it that you even used any of them?</p>

<p>This thread isn’t turning out too well for grayfalcon, there’s contradictions on every piece of advice.</p>

<p>not to be mean, but do u have nothing better to do than practice DBQs 10 months b4 a test?</p>

<p>it was good btw</p>

<p>How about this? For some, I cite documents. For others, I use author’s name. Is this OK?</p>

<p>And of 12 documents, I just use 9-10 of them, right?</p>

<p>@aa6590: Yes, this is really early and I do this because in normal school year, I have pretty tight schedule and sports. Moreover, I’m studying AP Euro independently and possibly take one or two more so that’s why I start early. Heck, it’s too hot outside now anyway.</p>

<p>Overall, I have to say that I had a lot of negative impressions on the DBQ. I thought that your quotes were too long and did not contain much analysis, and that your writing style made you look immature. Your DBQ didn’t include the other side of the argument, something that all readers want to read. There was not enough background information.</p>

<p>To respond to your last comments:

  1. No, don’t cite documents for some and use the author’s name for others. Use the author’s name and then at the end cite document letter. (e.g. In The Prince, Machiavelli ascertains that… (Doc. A)). You can’t go wrong with this, and you want to be consistent. And don’t use super-long concrete details. Quote only what you have to. The readers want to know your thinking and your analysis. They don’t want to read bunches of grouped documents. It’s good to use actual words from the documents, but your analysis has to shine through.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Yeah, 9-10 documents is fine, although I thought that DBQ’s now have a max of 11.</p></li>
<li><p>If you’re studying AP Euro independently, you should get a copy of Cracking the AP European History Exam by Princeton Review. Since you’re studying so early, you may actually have time to read the REA guide, but I recommend against using REA, because a lot of the text includes too many things you don’t need to know. Stay away from The Western Heritage by Kagan, Ozment, and Turner. Go for Western Civilization by Spielvogel. Repeat after me: Spielvogel, not Kagan. Spielvogel, not Kagan. It is much less dense than Kagan and more readable. Of course, now I’m rating two textbooks, not study guides. Also, I remember that Eugen Weber, a great French historian who taught a class on Intellectual Thought in Western Civilization at UCLA, used Mckay’s History of Western Society. If you go to <a href=“http://www.learner.org%5B/url%5D”>www.learner.org</a> and get a free account, you can see all of Eugen Weber’s lectures in a series called The Western Tradition.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Some quick advice on essay structure: a no-fail plan:</p>

<p>General statement/attention-getter as first sentence. Lead in to thesis. Thesis is the last sentence of intro.</p>

<p>Body Paragraph :
Topic Sentence
Concrete Detail
Commentary
Commentary
Concrete Detail
Commentary
Commentary
Transition</p>

<p>Repeat body paragraph as many times as needed</p>

<p>Conclusion:
Restate Thesis
Restate topic sentences
Concluding statement</p>

<p>Include bias and pov in there also. It’s kind of tricky, incorporating bias. the best thing to do is to ask your teacher for a DBQ that got a 9, and see how the author of that DBQ incorporated bias. Also include good outside info and you have an 8-9 essay.</p>

<p>yeah, def. go for spielvogel. its really good for AP Euro!</p>

<p>WHY WOULD YOU NOT BUT THE GROUPS IN THE OPENING.
GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON</p>

<p>I GOT A FIVE AND DID IT.</p>

<p>Pansies</p>