Essay help.

[thenewguy1 10]

Hello I'm working on an essay about Elizabethn hand weapons and armor. My essay is below. I'm asking for some tips on how to improve. NOTE: I'm in 8th grade also the formating is correct on the word document.

 

Elizabethan Weapons and Armor

 

What three old boy hasn’t dressed up as a knight with weapons wielded? They may not know it, but they dressed up similar to Elizabethan knights. Most of us wore just a typical sword and shield, but of course we as kids didn’t wear giant spears and we didn’t actually encase ourselves in armor. Elizabethan weapons varied from many sizes, the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap. Thus making Elizabethan weapons and armor very diverse.

 

There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era. One important type of weapon would be the melee weapons. Melee weapons are weapons used in hand to hand combat. There were many different types of melee weapons. Some weapons such as the broadsword measured up to 32 inches while some weapons like the great sword measured up to 72 inches (Alchin L.K.)! Some of the popular weapons in the Elizabethan era would be weapons like the Basilard, the mace, the falchion, the rapier, and last but not least, the long sword. The basilard was a double edged dagger (Alchin L.K.). While the basilard was very basic the mace had a slightly more complex design but the design proved to be lethal. The mace was a steel ball that was attached to a handle made out of wood (Alchin L.K.). Usually the steel ball was spiked which let the user take down their target with ease. Most weapons were derived from the long sword. For example, the rapier and the falchion were derived from the long sword. The falchion is like a 1 sided only sword, which is similar to a kitchen knife (Murrell 7). The rapier was a sharp sword with decoration on the cross guard (Murrell 7). But out of all the weapons, the long sword was the best. The long sword “allowed knights to use the force of his entire body which was very deadly” (Murrell 7). With these weapons they could take down just about any opponent. Except horseback riders. When your fiery opponent came charging at you, you had two last resorts. Either use a pike, or set up a caltrop. Pikes are long spears. Foot soldiers would stick the pike into the ground with the point pointing upwards thus scaring the horses. Any horse who challenged the pike would die (Murrell 8). The caltrop had four spikes so when three spikes were planted in the ground the fourth spike would stick upwards so when a horse ran over it, the horses leg would be wounded (Alchin L.K.).

 

 

There weren’t only hand weapons. There were bows and arrows, the famous crossbow, and more. The hand bow was a simple weapon. Very similar to modern day hand bows but Elizabethan hand bows were stronger (Murrell 10). Some strategies the Elizabethan archers used were that “Archers never aimed directly at their target. They targeted an area and fired at it” (Murrell 11). Also the archers who used crossbows would stand behind the archers with the hand bows and longbows to shoot (Murrell 12). The reason behind this was because the crossbow took around 1 minute to reload and could only fire 1 to 2 bolts a minute. In conclusion, ranged weapons in the Elizabethan era weren’t as diverse as the hand weapons, but were a vital part in warfare.

 

The armor used for protection varied from encasing the user in metal to being barely covered by leather. Elizabethan knights had to wear multiple pieces of armor such the collar plates. The collar plate was a steel armor that surrounded the neck and collar bone (Byam 26). For head defense the knights would use sallets or basinets. “Sallets are light, curved helms with sloped sides” (Murrell 21). To defend the legs they had to wear multiple pieces of armor. They wore the greaves, poleyns, and the cuisses to defend the legs (Mahabal). For peasants all they had to wear for armor was a leather cap which had little protection (Murrell 19). But a vital part that Elizabethan knights wore would be the chest plate. It covered the hips, abdomens, and lower back (Mahabal). The material that the armor was made from varied from steel paddings to leather. Chainmail was at first used to create armor but later replaced by steel plates (Mahabal). The armor protecting the arms was made of chainmail. Besagues were small round shields that covered the armpit (Mahabal). In conclusion Elizabethan armor had many different materials which ranged from Steel plates to leather and the knights were usually heavily armored.

 

In conclusion, Elizabethan weapons could as be as big as a teenager or could be as small as a newborn child. Elizabethan armor could be mistaken as the Iron Maden or couldn’t even be noticed until closer examination. If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

[Yuanrang 410]

How exactly do you primarily intend to improve? By polishing the language or by focusing on the content?

 

You might want to get started on the former and thoroughly proof-read your essay.

[thenewguy1 10]

How exactly do you primarily intend to improve? By polishing the language or by focusing on the content?

 

You might want to get started on the former and thoroughly proof-read your essay.

I want to focus on content mostly. Enough to get me a B.

Read it out loud to yourself and you'll notice that you're writing far different than you would speak (sentence fragments, repetitive structure, etc). Do some proofreading. :P

Thanks for the tips.

[reepicheep 324]

the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap.

 

And yes, read it aloud to yourself, it'll help immensely.

 

Regarding content,

If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

This is a wonderful sentiment, but completely disconnected from the rest of your essay. Your last sentence can't just be something you decided to tack on at the end.

 

Now, and since you're in the 8th grade this might not apply, I would go more in depth than you did. Again, might not be necessary, but at this point you've got a collection of short descriptions of weapons. Posting the exact goal of the assignment would be helpful in assessing that. Depending on what degree of freedom you have in writing this, it'd be better to focus on a single topic, say just armour or just melee weaponry. You'll be able to write more about each individual weapon and say useful things. This sort of looks like the introduction of a longer paper on medieval weaponry to me like this, rather than a paper of itself.

It's good that you use plenty of citations, but I'm fairly sure there's a way to only cite L.K. Alvin once at the end of that first paragraph. Depends on what style you're using, but it's a little bit jarring and I think unnecessary to repeat that citation over and over, especially considering you're not citing specific pages but entire books.

[Guitarguy 644]

As mentioned previously, a little revision would certainly help. But here's a few things that you might not catch on to:

-Don't use "they" or "their" as a genderless singular pronoun. It might be common in conversation, but it's slang nonetheless and not the sort of thing which should appear in an essay. In sentences such as the second one, replace it with a more suitable "he". If the gender isn't clear, use "he or she" (though in this context I believe you'll be safe to use "he", as women didn't tend to fight at that time).

-Likewise, try to avoid using the second person. "When your fiery opponent came charging at you, you had two last resorts." Again, this is moreso conversational than formal. You might replace it with something that could actually add information in a compact manner, e.g. "When a European knight's fiery opponent came charging at him, he had two last resorts." After all, the knight is only mentioned at the very beginning of the essay, which isn't a good choice in response to a key fact.

-Wherever possible, combine sentences. Use conjunctions, semicolons (albeit sparingly), or parenthetical expressions. For example, "There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era. One important type of weapon would be the melee weapons." In an essay, you should try to convey as much information as possible in as few words as possible; nobody likes to read the same half of one sentence in the next. A revision: "There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era, an important one being the melee weapons."

-On the same subject, try to shorten your sentences while retaining the same relevant information. If possible, do so in a creative manner: change sentence structure, use vocabulary that's a step up but not too uncommon, etc. For example, "While the basilard was very basic the mace had a slightly more complex design but the design proved to be lethal." You could easily shorten it to "While the basilard was very basic the mace had a slightly more complex design which proved to be lethal" or even "which proved its lethality". Incidentally, notice that I removed the word "but", as there didn't exist a contradiction between your two statements.

-Two clauses can't be connected with a comma alone. Remember that a clause includes its own subject and predicate. "Elizabethan weapons varied from many sizes, the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap." Both segments of this "sentence" are their own clause, so you should connect them with a conjunction or split them into single sentences. "Elizabethan weapons varied in many sizes. For example, the armor could be encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap." Or, "Elizabethan weapons varied in many sizes; the armor could be encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap."

 

Good luck!

Edited May 9, 2013 by Guitarguy

[thenewguy1 10]

the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap.

 

And yes, read it aloud to yourself, it'll help immensely.

 

Regarding content,

If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

This is a wonderful sentiment, but completely disconnected from the rest of your essay. Your last sentence can't just be something you decided to tack on at the end.

 

Now, and since you're in the 8th grade this might not apply, I would go more in depth than you did. Again, might not be necessary, but at this point you've got a collection of short descriptions of weapons. Posting the exact goal of the assignment would be helpful in assessing that. Depending on what degree of freedom you have in writing this, it'd be better to focus on a single topic, say just armour or just melee weaponry. You'll be able to write more about each individual weapon and say useful things. This sort of looks like the introduction of a longer paper on medieval weaponry to me like this, rather than a paper of itself.

It's good that you use plenty of citations, but I'm fairly sure there's a way to only cite L.K. Alvin once at the end of that first paragraph. Depends on what style you're using, but it's a little bit jarring and I think unnecessary to repeat that citation over and over, especially considering you're not citing specific pages but entire books.

I have loads of freedom in the writing and the teacher said to stick to the three topics, melee, ranged, and armor. Also if I don't cite the way I did then I get a 0. But thanks for the response!

[Common Sense 166]

 

What three old boy hasn’t dressed up as a knight with weapons wielded? They may not know it, but they were dressed up similar to Elizabethan knights. Most of us wore just a typical sword and shield, but of course we as kids didn’t wear giant spears and we didn’t actually encase ourselves in armor. Elizabethan weapons varied from many sizes in size--the armor could be from encased in armor to being or covered with just a leather cap. Thus making Elizabethan weapons and armor were thus very diverse.

 

There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era. One important type of weapon would be the melee weapons. Melee weapons are weapons, which were used in hand to hand combat. There were many different types of melee weapons. Some weapons such as the broadsword measured up to 32 inches while some other weapons like the great sword measured up to 72 inches (Alchin L.K.)! Some of the popular weapons in the Elizabethan era would be were weapons like the Basilard, the mace, the falchion, the rapier, and, last but not least, the long sword. The basilard was a double edged dagger (Alchin L.K.). While the basilard was very basic, the mace had a slightly more complex design but the design which proved to be lethal. The mace was a steel ball that was attached to a handle made out of wood (Alchin L.K.). Usually the steel ball was spiked which let the user take down their target with ease. Most weapons were derived from the long sword. For example, the rapier and the falchion were derived from the long sword. The falchion is was like a 1 sided only sword, which is similar to a kitchen knife (Murrell 7). The rapier was a sharp sword with decoration on the cross guard (Murrell 7). But out of all the weapons, the long sword was the best. The long sword “allowed knights to use the force of his entire body which was very deadly” (Murrell 7). With these weapons they could take down just about any opponent. Except except horseback riders. When your fiery opponent came charging at you, you had two last resorts. Either : either use a pike, or set up a caltrop. Pikes are were long spears. Foot soldiers would stick the pike into the ground with the point pointing upwards thus scaring the horses. Any horse who challenged the pike would die (Murrell 8). The caltrop had four spikes. so When three spikes were planted in the ground the fourth spike would stick upwards so that when a horse ran over it, the horses horse's leg would be wounded (Alchin L.K.).

 

There weren’t only hand weapons. There were bows and arrows, the famous crossbow, and more. The hand bow was a simple weapon. Very Although similar to modern day hand bows, but Elizabethan hand bows were stronger (Murrell 10). Some strategies the Elizabethan archers used were that “Archers never aimed directly at their target. They targeted an area and fired at it” (Murrell 11). Also the archers who used crossbows would stand behind the archers with the hand bows and longbows to shoot (Murrell 12). The reason behind this was because that the crossbow took around 1 minute to reload and could only fire 1 to 2 bolts a minute. In conclusion, ranged weapons in the Elizabethan era weren’t as diverse as the hand weapons, but were a vital part in warfare.

 

The armor used for protection varied from encasing the user in metal to being barely covered by leather. Elizabethan knights had to wear multiple pieces of armor such as the collar plates. The collar plate was a steel armor that surrounded the neck and collar bone (Byam 26). For head defense the knights would use sallets or basinets. “Sallets are light, curved helms with sloped sides” (Murrell 21). To defend the legs they had to wear multiple pieces of armor. They wore the greaves, poleyns, and the cuisses to defend the legs (Mahabal). For peasants all they All peasants had to wear for armor was a leather cap which had little protection (Murrell 19). But a vital part that Elizabethan knights wore would be the chest plate. It covered the hips, abdomens, and lower back (Mahabal). The material that the armor was made from varied from steel paddings to leather. Chainmail was at first used to create armor but later replaced by steel plates (Mahabal). The armor protecting the arms was made of chainmail. Besagues were small round shields that covered the armpit (Mahabal). In conclusion, Elizabethan armor had many different materials which ranged from steel plates to leather and the knights were usually heavily armored.

 

In conclusion, Elizabethan weapons could as be as big as a teenager or could be as small as a newborn child. Elizabethan armor could be mistaken as the for Iron Maiden or couldn’t might not even be noticed until closer examination. If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons, where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes knives, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

[reepicheep 324]

the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap.

 

And yes, read it aloud to yourself, it'll help immensely.

 

Regarding content,

If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

This is a wonderful sentiment, but completely disconnected from the rest of your essay. Your last sentence can't just be something you decided to tack on at the end.

 

Now, and since you're in the 8th grade this might not apply, I would go more in depth than you did. Again, might not be necessary, but at this point you've got a collection of short descriptions of weapons. Posting the exact goal of the assignment would be helpful in assessing that. Depending on what degree of freedom you have in writing this, it'd be better to focus on a single topic, say just armour or just melee weaponry. You'll be able to write more about each individual weapon and say useful things. This sort of looks like the introduction of a longer paper on medieval weaponry to me like this, rather than a paper of itself.

It's good that you use plenty of citations, but I'm fairly sure there's a way to only cite L.K. Alvin once at the end of that first paragraph. Depends on what style you're using, but it's a little bit jarring and I think unnecessary to repeat that citation over and over, especially considering you're not citing specific pages but entire books.

I have loads of freedom in the writing and the teacher said to stick to the three topics, melee, ranged, and armor. Also if I don't cite the way I did then I get a 0. But thanks for the response!

Ah, I'm not surprised about the citing. It's unfortunate, because it would help readability.

By 'stick to', do you mean you have to cover each one? If not, I highly recommend you focus on just one. Doing all three makes for an easy essay of average length, but also a relatively mediocre one. Focusing on one requires you to go more in depth and is slightly more difficult but also much better.

[thenewguy1 10]

the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap.

 

And yes, read it aloud to yourself, it'll help immensely.

 

Regarding content,

If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

This is a wonderful sentiment, but completely disconnected from the rest of your essay. Your last sentence can't just be something you decided to tack on at the end.

 

Now, and since you're in the 8th grade this might not apply, I would go more in depth than you did. Again, might not be necessary, but at this point you've got a collection of short descriptions of weapons. Posting the exact goal of the assignment would be helpful in assessing that. Depending on what degree of freedom you have in writing this, it'd be better to focus on a single topic, say just armour or just melee weaponry. You'll be able to write more about each individual weapon and say useful things. This sort of looks like the introduction of a longer paper on medieval weaponry to me like this, rather than a paper of itself.

It's good that you use plenty of citations, but I'm fairly sure there's a way to only cite L.K. Alvin once at the end of that first paragraph. Depends on what style you're using, but it's a little bit jarring and I think unnecessary to repeat that citation over and over, especially considering you're not citing specific pages but entire books.

I have loads of freedom in the writing and the teacher said to stick to the three topics, melee, ranged, and armor. Also if I don't cite the way I did then I get a 0. But thanks for the response!

Ah, I'm not surprised about the citing. It's unfortunate, because it would help readability.

By 'stick to', do you mean you have to cover each one? If not, I highly recommend you focus on just one. Doing all three makes for an easy essay of average length, but also a relatively mediocre one. Focusing on one requires you to go more in depth and is slightly more difficult but also much better.

Sadly I need to cover each one. This essay in my view is insanely poorly written due to the lack of facts given during my 3 hour research time. The only decent amount of facts where in the first body paragraph. But thank you for helping!

 

 

What three old boy hasn’t dressed up as a knight with weapons wielded? They may not know it, but they were dressed up similar to Elizabethan knights. Most of us wore just a typical sword and shield, but of course we as kids didn’t wear giant spears and we didn’t actually encase ourselves in armor. Elizabethan weapons varied from many sizes in size--the armor could be from encased in armor to being or covered with just a leather cap. Thus making Elizabethan weapons and armor were thus very diverse.

 

There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era. One important type of weapon would be the melee weapons. Melee weapons are weapons, which were used in hand to hand combat. There were many different types of melee weapons. Some weapons such as the broadsword measured up to 32 inches while some other weapons like the great sword measured up to 72 inches (Alchin L.K.)! Some of the popular weapons in the Elizabethan era would be were weapons like the Basilard, the mace, the falchion, the rapier, and, last but not least, the long sword. The basilard was a double edged dagger (Alchin L.K.). While the basilard was very basic, the mace had a slightly more complex design but the design which proved to be lethal. The mace was a steel ball that was attached to a handle made out of wood (Alchin L.K.). Usually the steel ball was spiked which let the user take down their target with ease. Most weapons were derived from the long sword. For example, the rapier and the falchion were derived from the long sword. The falchion is was like a 1 sided only sword, which is similar to a kitchen knife (Murrell 7). The rapier was a sharp sword with decoration on the cross guard (Murrell 7). But out of all the weapons, the long sword was the best. The long sword “allowed knights to use the force of his entire body which was very deadly” (Murrell 7). With these weapons they could take down just about any opponent. Except except horseback riders. When your fiery opponent came charging at you, you had two last resorts. Either : either use a pike, or set up a caltrop. Pikes are were long spears. Foot soldiers would stick the pike into the ground with the point pointing upwards thus scaring the horses. Any horse who challenged the pike would die (Murrell 8). The caltrop had four spikes. so When three spikes were planted in the ground the fourth spike would stick upwards so that when a horse ran over it, the horses horse's leg would be wounded (Alchin L.K.).

 

There weren’t only hand weapons. There were bows and arrows, the famous crossbow, and more. The hand bow was a simple weapon. Very Although similar to modern day hand bows, but Elizabethan hand bows were stronger (Murrell 10). Some strategies the Elizabethan archers used were that “Archers never aimed directly at their target. They targeted an area and fired at it” (Murrell 11). Also the archers who used crossbows would stand behind the archers with the hand bows and longbows to shoot (Murrell 12). The reason behind this was because that the crossbow took around 1 minute to reload and could only fire 1 to 2 bolts a minute. In conclusion, ranged weapons in the Elizabethan era weren’t as diverse as the hand weapons, but were a vital part in warfare.

 

The armor used for protection varied from encasing the user in metal to being barely covered by leather. Elizabethan knights had to wear multiple pieces of armor such as the collar plates. The collar plate was a steel armor that surrounded the neck and collar bone (Byam 26). For head defense the knights would use sallets or basinets. “Sallets are light, curved helms with sloped sides” (Murrell 21). To defend the legs they had to wear multiple pieces of armor. They wore the greaves, poleyns, and the cuisses to defend the legs (Mahabal). For peasants all they All peasants had to wear for armor was a leather cap which had little protection (Murrell 19). But a vital part that Elizabethan knights wore would be the chest plate. It covered the hips, abdomens, and lower back (Mahabal). The material that the armor was made from varied from steel paddings to leather. Chainmail was at first used to create armor but later replaced by steel plates (Mahabal). The armor protecting the arms was made of chainmail. Besagues were small round shields that covered the armpit (Mahabal). In conclusion, Elizabethan armor had many different materials which ranged from steel plates to leather and the knights were usually heavily armored.

 

In conclusion, Elizabethan weapons could as be as big as a teenager or could be as small as a newborn child. Elizabethan armor could be mistaken as the for Iron Maiden or couldn’t might not even be noticed until closer examination. If we didn’t have Elizabethan weapons, where would we be? We wouldn’t have the advanced knifes knives, guns, weapons, and bulletproof vests without the Elizabethan weapons and armor. Just think where we would be without Elizabethan weapons and armor.

thank you for the help. I feel like I am going to need some grammar lessons.

 

As mentioned previously, a little revision would certainly help. But here's a few things that you might not catch on to:

-Don't use "they" or "their" as a genderless singular pronoun. It might be common in conversation, but it's slang nonetheless and not the sort of thing which should appear in an essay. In sentences such as the second one, replace it with a more suitable "he". If the gender isn't clear, use "he or she" (though in this context I believe you'll be safe to use "he", as women didn't tend to fight at that time).

-Likewise, try to avoid using the second person. "When your fiery opponent came charging at you, you had two last resorts." Again, this is moreso conversational than formal. You might replace it with something that could actually add information in a compact manner, e.g. "When a European knight's fiery opponent came charging at him, he had two last resorts." After all, the knight is only mentioned at the very beginning of the essay, which isn't a good choice in response to a key fact.

-Wherever possible, combine sentences. Use conjunctions, semicolons (albeit sparingly), or parenthetical expressions. For example, "There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era. One important type of weapon would be the melee weapons." In an essay, you should try to convey as much information as possible in as few words as possible; nobody likes to read the same half of one sentence in the next. A revision: "There were many types of weapons during the Elizabethan era, an important one being the melee weapons."

-On the same subject, try to shorten your sentences while retaining the same relevant information. If possible, do so in a creative manner: change sentence structure, use vocabulary that's a step up but not too uncommon, etc. For example, "While the basilard was very basic the mace had a slightly more complex design but the design proved to be lethal." You could easily shorten it to "While the basilard was very basic the mace had a slightly more complex design which proved to be lethal" or even "which proved its lethality". Incidentally, notice that I removed the word "but", as there didn't exist a contradiction between your two statements.

-Two clauses can't be connected with a comma alone. Remember that a clause includes its own subject and predicate. "Elizabethan weapons varied from many sizes, the armor could be from encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap." Both segments of this "sentence" are their own clause, so you should connect them with a conjunction or split them into single sentences. "Elizabethan weapons varied in many sizes. For example, the armor could be encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap." Or, "Elizabethan weapons varied in many sizes; the armor could be encased in armor to being covered with just a leather cap."

 

Good luck!

thank you for the feedback :)

[Yuanrang 410]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

[thenewguy1 10]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

I originally was going to do what you said, but I couldn't find anything that said how each thing imacted what. Also I suppose I should add the question I'm suppose to answer. "Describe the weapons and armor used in the Elizabethan era." I was originally going to do "Describe the weapons in the Elizabethan era and how they impacted warfare." But sadly there wasn't enough content about it to write and essay so I went with my first question.

[reepicheep 324]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

This is what I'm getting at. If you're limited by the amount of research, however, there's probably not much you can do. Don't forget you don't have to list every single weapon ever used - if there are any, leave out weapons that weren't all too popular and instead expand on the other ones. Again though, if you don't have the information, the only thing you can do is research some more.

 

EDIT: Could you maybe write more about each weapon's advantages and disadvantages? You already do, but you could write more about it so that it's less list-y.

Edited May 9, 2013 by reepicheep

[thenewguy1 10]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

This is what I'm getting at. If you're limited by the amount of research, however, there's probably not much you can do. Don't forget you don't have to list every single weapon ever used - if there are any, leave out weapons that weren't all too popular and instead expand on the other ones. Again though, if you don't have the information, the only thing you can do is research some more.

 

EDIT: Could you maybe write more about each weapon's advantages and disadvantages? You already do, but you could write more about it so that it's less list-y.

Honestly I've tried writing on the advantages. It's just the fact of not enough info and I can't really do that either since as that would result in a deduction of points. So let me take back my saying of loads of freedom and put it into the equivalent of a jail cell.

[reepicheep 324]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

This is what I'm getting at. If you're limited by the amount of research, however, there's probably not much you can do. Don't forget you don't have to list every single weapon ever used - if there are any, leave out weapons that weren't all too popular and instead expand on the other ones. Again though, if you don't have the information, the only thing you can do is research some more.

 

EDIT: Could you maybe write more about each weapon's advantages and disadvantages? You already do, but you could write more about it so that it's less list-y.

Honestly I've tried writing on the advantages. It's just the fact of not enough info and I can't really do that either since as that would result in a deduction of points. So let me take back my saying of loads of freedom and put it into the equivalent of a jail cell.

Pretty much, yeah :P I think it's nonsensical to limit the amount of research (though I can see a bit of logic behind it, I suppose), but if you can't then I'm not sure what you could change. In what format do you have your research?

[Yuanrang 410]

Ah, if you want to focus on content, you should definately look at how most of your content is you basically listing up various types of items and the generic properties of them. This is not all that informative, it comes off as a generic list of bulletpoints shaped like a text and you probably try to cover too many items.

 

Think about it: You list the physical properties, but you say nothing about the impact each weapon had on warfare and combat commonly found in that era. As an example: Why did they switch from chainmail to more sturdier plated armor variants? This is a more in-depth analysis and far more thorough compared to making a list of items and their physical properties.

This is what I'm getting at. If you're limited by the amount of research, however, there's probably not much you can do. Don't forget you don't have to list every single weapon ever used - if there are any, leave out weapons that weren't all too popular and instead expand on the other ones. Again though, if you don't have the information, the only thing you can do is research some more.

 

EDIT: Could you maybe write more about each weapon's advantages and disadvantages? You already do, but you could write more about it so that it's less list-y.

Honestly I've tried writing on the advantages. It's just the fact of not enough info and I can't really do that either since as that would result in a deduction of points. So let me take back my saying of loads of freedom and put it into the equivalent of a jail cell.

What is your age? 13/14? If so, then you are at the same age as the students in two of the classes I teach, and I must admit, your paper is not particularily convincing. This is not meant as an insult, but your text seems like a written text written from a Wikipedia article on melee combat in the Elizabethan Era, something along the lines of this formula:

 

1: List weapon name

2: Mention appearance

3: Move on to the next item

4: Repeat until you have reached the required length of the paper

5: Write a brief conclusion.

 

When I read the text, I feel awkward because I get this nagging voice in my head, telling me that you lack any real content beyond item listings. This is the paper equivalent of a student writing a story or a fairy tale, and then he just writes rapid one-liners were he sketch out the plot quickly without expanding or describing anything.

A valid example of this is your brief mention of the rapier, for instance, yet you neglect to mention that it was primarily used when Nobles had to partake in fencing against other Nobles. It was a weapon of prestige and settling matters regarding honor, it was not frequently used in warfare due to the sheer frailty of the blade.

 

A good conclusion is possibly to sum up how the many centuries of using melee weapons had a final swan song in the Elizabethan Era before the rise of gunpowder based weaponry. Not only does that emphasise the sophistication of the weapons and armor found in the Era (if you do it right), but it also puts the end of the Medieval Era in a direct historical timeline next to the rise of firearms, which has dominated warfare up to this very day.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Yuanrang

[thepope1322 399]

I'm not a teacher like Yuanrang is but my advice is to remember that, when you are writing about history, or things related to history, what's most important is the significance of what you are writing about. Writing "weapon x looked like this while weapon y looked like this", while true, is likely to bore your reader and doesn't provide any real insight.

Edited May 13, 2013 by theking1322

[thenewguy1 10]

I got a B+ (85%) thank you everyone!

[reepicheep 324]

Well done :D

[Yuanrang 410]

You should definately take Lilshu's advice to heart and look at what you have to do to improve further. I would also have jotted down some of the comments here and saved in a notepad, simply because there has been quite a bit of helpful advices in this thread that will be highly relevant when writing most types of hand-in papers.

 

You could see that B+ as a grade above the anticipated B, or you could see it as proof that you are capable of reaching for an A with some extra work. The choice is entirely yours, but as a teacher, I would encourage you to make the best of your potential. You might regret it in the future if you do not get the grades you could have received. :P

[thenewguy1 10]

Awesome, congratulations! What tips did your teacher give you for next time? The battle's not over when your grades are back- you should look how you can improve each time.

She said good job and mostly corrected my grammar. That's literally all she did as far as tips and probably two things about transition. I also have a B- in the class which improved from a C so thanks once again!