其实开这个帖子主要是闲得没事干...... 再加上身边有人好奇在国外怎么写历史论文2333333我估计吧里的出国党都没有我这个闲情逸致去选修历史课的吧23333333

好了进入正题吧。

首先普及一下吧。什么叫做primary resource，secondary resource和tertiary resource。primary resource就相当于第一手资料。比较典型的是申时行的召对录。还有各种原版史料。secondary resource就是后人分析前人留下的史料写的东西。比如王夫之的那一堆。tertiary resource就是各种百科全书。总结所有前人留下的资料然后精简而成的。在西方，写论文的话，要引用大量的primary resource，secondary resource。什么前人的日记啦之类的是他们最看重的资料。其重要程度甚至要超过所谓的盎格鲁撒克逊编年史。为毛呢？因为他们认为当权者写下的史料不够客观，所以不足采信.................anyways。如果你炮制了一篇论文，但是没有给出出典，那么你就是抄袭。抄袭是个很严重的罪名2333333333。而且真正的论文，每句话都是要有出处的。绝对的力求严谨。

下面贴出我写的两篇大论文...........满足一下某些人的好奇心。

这一篇的主题是论莫卧儿王朝时期印度婚姻状况。选用的primary resource是一个印度耆那教徒的自传。此自传成书于16世纪中期笔者55岁的时候。自传的名字叫做half a tale。因为在耆那教中110岁为一个轮回，当时作者55岁，所以他认为他还有一半的人生没有过完（当然写完了以后两年他就因病去世了囧）。本书主要讲了他的家庭出身，他作为商人的成就和他先后娶的三名妻子，他的早早夭折的孩子们，还有家庭生活，社会习俗，还有宗教。此书被广大史学家认为是具有较高价值的史料，同时本书亦是印度语中第一部自传体文学作品，具有较高地位。感兴趣的可以自行观看。

Marriagesin “Half a Tale” by Banarasidas
The"Ardhakathanaka" or “Half a Tale”, by Banarasidas, a Jain merchant inancient Mughal India, is a remarkable piece of literature in Indian culture.Written during the heyday of the Mughal rule around 1641 A. D. when the authorwas fifty-five years old, it is perhaps the only autobiography that gives adetailed account of Indian and Jain tradition. Banarasidas, its author, wasevidently successful in being vivid and genuine while describing hisobservations and reflections on the three aspects of marriages andrelationships between spouses. It can be inferred that ancient Indian marriageceremonies are frequently finished early in life, that spousal relationshipsare sometimes extremely supportive and intimate and that marriages can also bea symbol of status and wealth.
Marriageswere typically arranged at a very early stage of life in ancient India. Theauthor, Banarasidas, was married to a young girl that he was eleven years old,after two years of engagement. It is referred that Banarasidas had been born in1643, and by 1654 he was already married to the daughter of the merchantKalyanmal in Khairabad: “…but it had long subsided before the month of Magh inVikram 1654 when I journeyed to Khairabad for my wedding. I commenced myjourney on the twelfth of the bright half of Magh, and soon returned home amarried man.” (p. 16) Banarasidas was not yet twelve when he was married, anage when a modern boy is still attending elementary school. In addition, it canbe inferred Banarasidas’ younger sister is also married at a young age of ten.It is unknown to the readers when the older sister of Banarasidas is married,since her year of birth is not accounted. But, the year of birth of his youngersister is written down as the same year of his wedding. Banarasidas mentionsthe following coincidence that occurred on his wedding day: “This curiousjuxtaposition of events troubled my mind for long. On the same day, in the samehouse, my father’s grandmother was breathing her last, and my mother was givingbirth to my sister, while at that moment a new bride was being welcomed at thedoor.” (p. 16) Thus, his sister was born in 1654. Then it was later revealedthat she was finally married and went to live with her husband in 1664 (p. 42).She was ten when she was married. Based on the marriage dates of Banarasidasand his sister, we can determine that a majority of marriages were arrangedearly in one’s life. And, the tone of the author when describing the matter iscalm and does not show any surprise, which further proves that marriages at ayoung age is common in Indian culture.
Traditionally,marriages were sources of warmth and consolation in ancient India. This can beinferred from the author’s own experience. The spousal relationship was sweetand supportive in Banarasidas’ first marriage, just as any marriage in anyculture does. When he was sick in bed, his wife nursed him and attended himwith medication (p. 30). And, as Banarasidas spent all the money he earned inAgra, his wife consoled him and begged her mother for help. She then encouragedhim to start all over his business again in Agra by secretly giving him twohundred rupees her mother had given her (p. 53-54). It can be inferred that hiswife’s support and consolation were very important to him, because he thenvividly describes that he “became infused with new life” (p. 54). Then, around1671, his first wife was dead after giving birth to a son in her father’s house(p. 64). When the news was brought to Banarasidas, he felt “like a pair ofblacksmith’s pincers which continually alternate between the burning flames anda pail full of cold water” (p. 64). He then began to cry (p. 64). This deeploss and grief never took place again when his second wife from the subsequentmarriage passed away, nor does any description of intimacy between them. Banarasidasand his first wife must have enjoyed mutual respect and affection while theywere married. Banarasidas’ own marriage can serve as an example of spousalrelationships in Mughal India where husband was responsible for externalmatters such as earning a living to support his family while wife was supposedto support the husband. As seen previously, married life in ancient Indiaresembles contemporary insights of spousal relationships.
Marriageswere also a representation of wealth and social status. Banarasidas describesat the beginning that when his father Kharagsen lost his business partnerSundardas, he “called a council of five elders to decide how much of the jointwealth that he has shared with [Sundardas] belonged rightfully to [hisdaughter] (p. 10).” Sundardas had no sons to inherit his properties and wealthbut only an unmarried daughter. And, as a result, the daughter inherited theshares of the business as a dowry. The groom of this girl would gain morewealth and money by marrying such a girl with precious dowry and strengthentheir influence. Another possible example would be Banarasidas’ own marriageswith the two daughters of a businessman (p. 16, 64). After Banarasidas’ firstwife had died, Banarasidas’ father-in-law “thoughtfully” offered the sister ofthe previous wife as the new bride (p. 64). This marriage could just have beenarranged as a convenience for the two families to maintain their status andties; in other words, marriages often took place between two people that arefrom the same background so that both families can benefit from the bonds thatformed between them. So, marriages were a rather useful method for clans toremain prominent in the society and to become even more influential than beforein Mughal India.
Basedon his experiences with his three marriages, his memories of his father’s life storiesand his sister’s marriage, Banarasidas’ accounts of marriages and spousalrelationships were traditions that were typical in ancient India. Marriageswere done at a young age, sources of safety and affection and a symbol ofsocial position. Banarasidas' story is an irvaluable witness to thepervasiveness of the marriage in the life of an individual. Even though hisautobiography is considered subjective and personal, his accounts can still applyto the larger society in which he lived and give the readers a glimpse intomarried life in Mughal India. The world in which he lived defined his manner oflife as well as interests, demarcating also the social arena within which hehad meaningful insights on spousal relations in Mughal India, while it stillintrigues the readers today and becomes an irreplaceable source to modern-dayhistorians.
BibliographicalReference and Page References
Banarasidas, TheArdhakathanaka, in Mukund Lath, ed., Halfa Tale: A Study in the InterrelationshipBetween Autobiography and History (Jaipur: RajasthanPrakit Bharati Sansthan, 1981), pp. 1-97.

下一篇是比较西方（英国伦敦）和东方（京都）文化的。引用史料比较多。

Comparing Two Capitals: London and Kyotofrom 1600 to 1800
Cities are permanent human settlements that usually growinto cultural and business centers later. Different cities reflect differentcultures and values. London in Europe and Kyoto in Japan, for example, are twoculturally distinct cities in which their residents led different lifestylesand societal norms in the years between 1600 and 1800. London, the capital of Great Britain, was founded by the Romans after their invasion of 43 A.D. [1]butflourished after the 16th century both economically and culturally[2],was a good representative of typical European metropolis. On the other side Kyoto,the old capital of Japan for more than one thousand years[3], provides a contrast to the European capital. Among all the contrast that can possibly be drawn between them, political or administrative functions of thecity, cultural functions and episodes of natural disturbance are thefundamental differences.
The political functions of Kyoto and London aredissimilar in nature. Kyoto of Japan, which played an important role inJapanese history, was declared the seat of Japan's imperial court in 794[4].Since then it had been the seat of the imperial court for more than one thousand years. By the virtue of the imperial presence, it became the cultural center of the country. On the other side, London had been the largest city in England since 9th century, but it was not formally declared capital until 12th century[5].After he was crowned in 1066, William the Conqueror constructed the Tower of London in the southeastern corner of the city to intimidate the native inhabitants. In 1097, William the second began the building of Westminster Hall, close by the abbey of the same name. The hall became the basis of a new Palace of Westminster, which is still a crucial place of politics andgovernment in England in the period of 16th to 18thcentury[6].The Stuart kings and queens in this period continued to occupy it and hosted parliamentary meetings. London was then developed into a true capital in governmental termsand remained the political and commercial center. Kyoto, however, is not thesame as London. Even though the imperial family, or the Emperor, resided inKyoto, the true administration of the country was controlled by the shogunate,led by the shogun. In other words, the Emperor did not participate in rulingthe country himself; he lost his power to the powerful shogun. The shoguns always chose their family seat to set their governments. In the period of 16thto 18th century, it was the Tokugawa Shogunate who had the truepower, whilst they set their central government in Edo, their family seat[7].Thus, it can be concluded that while London was the true capital in politicalterms, but Kyoto was merely a capital in name only.
Both London and Kyoto were the most important culturaland symbolic cities in their respective countries. Although not the truecapital politically, Kyoto flourished culturally and attracted many artists andmonks. Many shrines and Buddhist temples were built, and Buddhism became fashion. In addition to religion, another kind of performance art known as Nohwas popularized in the period of 16th to 18th century. Noh originated from ancient rites and featured acrobats, song and dance as well ascomic sketches. The making of Noh masks were also a typical representation of arts and crafts in Kyoto during Tokugawa Shogunate period.[8]The imperial court, the nobility and the wealthy commoners supported thedevelopment of Noh. Using the money provided by the aristocracy, Noh artistsrecorded every detail of the Noh play so that it could be preserved to today. Similarly,London flourished culturally under the pre-eminent dramatist William Shakespeare. In the 16th to 17th century William Shakespeare and his contemporaries lived in London at a time of hostility tothe development of the theatre. They proved themselves successful in entertaining both the aristocracy and commoners by performing a series of unforgettable playsincluding Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth and King Lear[9].Shakespeare's work has made a lasting impression on later theatre andliterature. In particular, his style influenced the subsequent writers such as Alexander Pope, John Milton and Samuel Johnson in the period of 16thto 18th century[10].They all became great writers. In general, Kyoto and London are similar in theway that they both reached Golden Age pf art, particularly of theatrical art.
In the terms of natural disturbance, both cities experienced notable changes. Specifically, there were great fires that almost destroyed the cities. In Kyoto, there was a great fire that took place on March 7th of the year 1788. This fire was called “one of the biggest threegreat fires in Kyoto” and it burned down 80% of the city[11].Careful reconstruction followed but only parts of the original city could be rebuilt. And, in London, there was The Great Fire of London from September 2nd,1666 to September 5th, 1666[12].The Great Fire consumed numerous houses and churches, including the famous St.Paul’s Cathedral. Despite many other radical proposals, the city was rebuiltusing the same street plan as before the fire[13].In a short period of time, both cities revived and continued to grow and develop, revealing the ability of architecture and civil engineering andpersistence of their residents.
In conclusion, Kyoto and London, both were the capitalcities of their countries during the period of 16th to 18thcentury, are same in the ways that they were cultural metropolis and natural disturbance almost destroying their existence. But, they are different because of their political importance. In the next two hundred years, London grew to be the true center of UK, or even of the world; whilst Kyoto faded only as a rather “tranquil and peaceful city[14]”,as its old name suggests. Both cities, however, have cultural heritages that modern people admire.

Bibliography 和 footnotes我不放了。度娘说我广告...........

另外，这两篇论文的格式是MLA。MLA一般是文科必备的格式。理科的论文一般用APA。这两种格式对哪里要用斜体字哪里要用粗体字都是有要求的233333333333。用不好直接就能零分。

度娘的排版我无力了反正大家凑合看看吧。希望可以满足一部分人的好奇心23333333
说在最后的话：真正学术的历史，不是某些人想的那样子。反正至少是在西方，你如果想跨入这个学科，就要做好心理准备。“真正”的历史，不是由王侯将相书写而成。它也许很枯燥，也许很好玩。

此致，接下来大家请随意吐槽灌水~~~~

@ting9507 FUFUFU 乃毕竟是专业人才抽空来指点下我咯233333333

呵呵，如果第一个指教的是我你会不会很吃惊呢？
国内专业的历史大概更接近考古，你可以咨询　@算无遗策郗嘉宾　这个哥哥
我的话说句不怕被秋雨打的话，就是从文学创作需要去关注历史框架，盘算怎么钻空子~
FU大人的文学才华也很让我倾心啦~
实话讲看了以后是有点羡慕你们留学党……