Module HSH-3142:
Going to the Devil
Going to the Devil? The Life and Rule of Henry II (1133-1189) 2024-25
HSH-3142
2024-25
School Of History, Law And Social Sciences
Module - Semester 1
20 credits
Module Organiser:
Mark Hagger
Overview
The course will examine a number of important episodes of Henry II's life and reign, and also key themes such as the growth in the efficiency and expertise of royal government, the development of the English common law, and the patronage or punishment of subjects, the right balance of which was vital to successful kingship. Close attention will also be given to Robert of Torigni's Chronicle, Gerald of Wales's The Conquest of Ireland, and a number of textbooks produced at the time such as the legal treatise known as Glanvill, The Dialogue of the Exchequer, and The Civilized Man - the first book of etiquette. The castles constructed by Henry II will also be considered, as will some of the wall-paintings and manuscript illuminations produced during his reign, so as to provide a rounded picture of the environment in which Henry lived. The module handbook provides a full breakdown of the content of the module.
Assessment Strategy
-threshold -Threshold students (D- and D) will have done only a minimum of reading, and their work will often be based partly on lecture notes and/or basic textbooks. They will demonstrate in their written assessments some knowledge of at least parts of the relevant field, and will make at least partially-successful attempts to frame an argument which engages with historical controversies, but they will fail to discuss some large and vital aspects of a topic; and/or deploy only some relevant material but partly fail to combine it into a coherent whole; and/or deploy some evidence to support individual points but often fail to do so and/or show difficulty weighing evidence (thereby relying on unsuitable or irrelevant evidence when making a point). Alternatively or additionally, the presentation of the work might also be poor, with bad grammar and/or punctuation, careless typos and spelling errors, and a lack of effective and correct referencing. -good -There are three grades for upper second-class performance:B+ (68%)Work will receive a B+ mark if it is consistently strong in: covering the necessary ground in depth and detail; advancing a well-structured, relevant, and focused argument; analysis and deployment of an appropriate range of historical and/or archaeological evidence and consideration of possible differences of interpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate.B (65%)Work will receive a B mark if it: is clear that it is based on solid reading; covers the necessary ground in depth and detail; advances a well-structured, relevant, and focused argument; analyses and deploys an appropriate range of historical and/or archaeological evidence and considers possible differences of interpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate.B- (62%)Work will receive a B- mark if it: is clearly based on solid reading; covers the necessary ground in some depth and detail; advances a properly-structured, relevant, and focused argument; analyses and deploys an appropriate range of historical and/or archaeological evidence and considers possible differences of interpretation; and is correctly presented with references and bibliography where appropriate. -excellent -There are four grades for first-class performance:A* (95%) At this level, first-class work earns its mark by showing genuine originality. It may advance a novel argument or deal with evidence which has not been considered before. Such originality of ideas or evidence is coupled with the standards of content, argument, and analysis expected of first-class work graded at A or A+. At this level, the work exhausts relevant secondary material, includes in dissertation work extensive and often unanticipated primary evidence, and betrays no factual or interpretative inaccuracy. It can also show a mastery of theory and deploy hypotheses subtly and imaginatively. In the case of essays and dissertations, work of this standard will be impeccable in presentation and will be publishable.A+ (87%)At this level, first-class work will also have its argument supported by an impressive wealth and relevance of detail, but will further deploy the evidence consistently accurately and give indications of deploying unexpected primary and secondary sources. It will habitually demonstrate a particularly acute and critical awareness of the historiography and/or archaeological debate, including conceptual approaches, and give a particularly impressive account of why the conclusions reached are important within a particular historical or archaeological debate. It will show a particularly sophisticated approach to possible objections, moderating the line taken in the light of counter-examples, or producing an interesting synthesis of various contrasting positions. It will be original work. The standards of content, argument, and analysis expected will be consistently first-class work. In essays and dissertations standards of presentation will be very high.A (80%)At this level, first-class work will have its argument supported by an impressive wealth and relevance of detail. It will usually also demonstrate an acute awareness of historiography and/or archaeological debate, and give an impressive account of why the conclusions reached are important within a particular historical or archaeological debate. It may show a particularly subtle approach to possible objections, moderating the line taken in the light of counter-examples, or producing an interesting synthesis of various contrasting positions. Overall, the standards of content, argument, and analysis expected will be consistently superior to top upper-second work. In essays and dissertations standards of presentation will be high.A- (74%)A first-class mark at this level is often earned simply by demonstrating one or more of the features of a good upper-second essay to a peculiar degree, for example presenting a particularly strong organization of argument, strong focus, wide range of reading, engagement with the historiography and/or archaeological debate, depth of understanding, an unobjectionable style, and strong presentation. -another level-There are three grades for lower second-class performance:C+ (58%)Work will receive a C+ mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but remains partially superficial; covers the important aspects of the relevant field, but in some places lacks depth; advances a coherent and relevant argument; employs some evidence to back its points; and is presented reasonably well with only a few or no mistakes. It will also contain appropriate references and bibliography, which may, however, be slightly erratic and/or partially insufficient.C (55%)Work will receive a C mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but remains superficial; covers most of the important aspects of the relevant field, but lacks depth; advances a coherent and largely relevant argument; employs some limited evidence to back its points; and is presented reasonably well with only limited mistakes. It will also contain appropriate references and bibliography, which may, however, contain some mistakes or be slightly erratic and/or partially insufficient.C- (52%)Work will receive a C- mark if it: shows evidence of solid reading, but little knowledge of in-depth studies (for first-year work the student may not have read beyond a few standard works; at second or third year the student may not have read a good selection of journal articles and specialist monographs); covers most of the important aspects of the relevant field, but lacks depth or misses a significant area (for second- and third-year work this may mean that it fails to deploy the historical details found in specialist literature); advances a coherent, and sometimes relevant argument, but drifts away from tackling the task in hand (for example, by ordering the argument in an illogical way, becoming distracted by tangential material, or lapsing into narrative of only partial pertinence); usually employs evidence to back its points, but occasionally fails to do so or deploys an insufficient range; displays an awareness that the past can be interpreted in different ways, but may fail to get to the heart of the central scholarly debate or fully understand a key point (in second- and third-year work this may extend to a failure to discuss important subtleties or ambiguities in the evidence, or to a lack of awareness of the current state of historical or archaeological debate); is reasonably well presented and contains appropriate references and bibliography, but makes some mistakes in presentation or appropriate use. For lower second-class marks for gobbet answers in third-year examinations specifically: the answer discusses the content and context of the general document from which the gobbet is taken, but fails to concentrate on the particular passage set and to discuss its particular significance. Alternatively, the answer may analyse the particular passage but fail to say enough about its wider context.
Learning Outcomes
- Students taking this module will acquire a close familiarity with a range of relevant primary sources (in translation). These sources will be introduced in the seminars and students will be able to access them via Blackboard. The ability to analyse these sources and use them in argument will be promoted by seminars and by feedback on coursework
- Students taking this module will acquire a detailed knowledge of the topic through reading and seminar discussion
- Students taking this module will be expected to use relevant software for presentations (e.g. Power Point) and essays (e.g. Word). They will also demonstrate and develop research skills through the use of online databases and other resources (e.g. the Bibliography of British and Irish History and a number of digitized archives in England and France).
- Students taking this module will become aware of competing portrayals (in the primary sources) and interpretations (in both primary and secondary sources) of various events and themes and will develop an ability to judge between them, in both cases through their own reading and the seminars
- Students taking this module will develop oral communication skills through seminar discussion and will develop team-working skills through some of the activities that take place during seminars (e.g. the role-play of an Exchequer session)
- Students taking this module will develop the ability to form sophisticated and cogent historical arguments. This will be promoted by reading, by practice in seminars, and by feedback on coursework essays
Assessment method
Exam (Centrally Scheduled)
Assessment type
Summative
Description
A two-hour exam during which students must complete answers to two questions.
Weighting
50%
Assessment method
Individual Presentation
Assessment type
Summative
Description
A fifteen minute presentation on a topic chosen by the student with the convenor's approval. The presentation will include a power point presentation and will be followed by five minutes for questions.
Weighting
50%