Do you find one argument more convincing in the case

HAVC 160A Critical Analysis Paper: The Sun Stone

submit papers on Canvas as a Word doc or docx

Late papers accepted with 5 point penalty until 5 p.m., Oct. 25

“Critical analysis” refers to the dissection of an argument. The objective of this assignment is to distinguish among unsubstantiated assertion, unpersuasive argumentation, and a compelling thesis based on reliable evidence. Critical analysis is not based on writing style nor on belief, but on reason. A critical analysis does not necessarily find fault; it can praise as well as criticize. This paper requires you to critically analyze, compare and contrast, two articles on the most studied and best known Mexica (Aztec) monument: the Sun Stone (aka Calendar Stone).

Adhere closely to these directions: 1. Before reading the two articles that will be the focus of your analysis, consult some

general sources on the Sun Stone to acquire a basic background. Begin with your textbook (Miller, pp. 254-55). Although consulting online sources is risky, the following provide fairly standard, reliable information:

https://www.ancient.eu/Sun_Stone/

2. Read the following two recent scholarly re-interpretations of the Sun Stone (both are available as pdfs on Canvas > Files > Paper):

A. Stuart, David. 2016. “The Face of the Calendar Stone: A New Interpretation.” Online post, Maya Decipherment <https://decipherment.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/the-face-of-the-calendar-stone-a-new- interpretation/>

B. Milbrath, Susan. 2017. “Eclipse Imagery on the Aztec Calendar Stone.” Mexicon 39(1):16-26

3. In essay format, compare and contrast the articles by Stuart and Milbrath. What

kinds of evidence does each use (archaeological, historical, iconographical, other)? Do you find one argument more convincing? If so, why? If not, why not? Be sure to state your opinion and the reasoning behind your assessment. Note: This assignment is not about being right or wrong, but employing reasoning to assess scholarly argumentation. Before you begin writing, read the paper requirements below.

Paper requirements. Be sure that your paper includes the following: § A title page with the title of your paper, your name, the course number (HAVC

160A), and the date

§ An introductory paragraph introducing the paper topic and featuring your thesis statement

§ A concise summary of both Stuart’s thesis and that of Milbrath (a sentence or

two each; no more than a paragraph). To demonstrate your understanding, phrase the theses of both scholars in your own words—do not quote! Note: Both Stuart and Milbrath are cisgender; use masculine pronouns when referring to Stuart and feminine pronouns when discussing Milbrath.

§ An identification and discussion of the kinds of evidence used by each author

(archaeological, historical, iconographical, other)

§ A comparison of the author’s conclusions with each other and with those of other scholars (Miller’s text, recommended online sources, lecture material). Your sources should be cited using Chicago’s author-date style; a brief guide to Chicago Style is posted on Canvas (Files > Paper). If you use information from lectures to develop your analysis, be sure to provide the appropriate citation (e.g., Dean, HAVC 160A Lecture: 10/16/2018).

§ Your reasoned evaluation of both authors’ evidence, arguments, and conclusions

§ A concluding paragraph with a concise summary statement. State your position

clearly even if it is ambivalent!

§ A bibliography, formatted according to Chicago Style, that includes the full publication data of all works you consulted (but none that you didn’t actually examine). A concise guide to Chicago style is posted on Canvas (Files > Paper).

Papers should be at least 750 words, but no longer than 1,500 words, and should be typed, double-spaced, with numbered pages (except the title page, which is never numbered). Use at least 10-point font. Submit your finished paper to Canvas as a Word document (doc, docx) by the time/date required to avoid loss of points for a late submission. Refer to the evaluation rubric (below), double-checking to make sure you have completed all required elements.

HAVC 160A

Critical Analysis Paper Evaluation

_____of 05 – Paper specifications (Is the paper neat with numbered pages [except for

title page]?; Is the required information provided on the title page? Is the paper double-spaced? Is the word count adhered to?)

_____of 15 – Grammar, spelling, & citations (Are grammar & spelling correct? Is the paper well-written in lucid prose? Is Chicago Style used properly for BOTH in-text citations & the bibliography?)

_____of 10 – Organization (Is there an introductory paragraph with a thesis statement? Is the argument presented logically with smooth transitions? Is there a concluding paragraph with a summary statement? Is the paper presented in the correct order: Title page, text, bibliography?)

_____of 10 – Summary of Stuart (Is Stuart’s thesis correctly identified and briefly summarized without quotation?)

_____of 10 – Summary of Milbrath (Is Milbrath’s thesis correctly identified and briefly summarized without quotation?)

_____of 10 – Identification & critique of Stuart’s evidence

_____of 10 – Identification & critique of Milbrath’s evidence

_____of 20 – Comparison of Stuart and Milbrath (Is the discussion thorough, thoughtful, and accurate?)

_____of 10 – Overall evaluation (Is the evaluation well-reasoned?)

_____of 100