Skip over navigation
Brown shield Brown shield Brown University Brown shield Brown shield Brown University History Department at Brown University

The Honors Program in History

The Honors Program in History offers qualified students the opportunity to devote themselves to writing history through the honors thesis. The thesis is not simply a long term paper. It is ideally an original work no different in kind from what professional historians produce. In fact, a number of history theses have subsequently been revised and published. Although the topics often may be narrow, the intellectual rewards are broad and far-reaching. In writing a thesis most students learn more about critical thinking, composition, and reconstructing the past than they do in regular courses. The thesis process also teaches how to undertake a long-term project requiring perseverance, imagination, and not a little optimism. The Honors Program is thus an integral part of a liberal arts education.

The work in History 93-94 is demanding and often becomes very absorbing of students' time and interest. Only about a quarter of the graduating History concentrators choose to write Honors theses. Because of the self-selecting nature of the Program, a very high proportion (95% or more) of the completed theses are awarded Honors.

Requirements for the Honors Program

  1. To enroll in the Honors Program, the student must be a senior History concentrator and have taken History 92 (the Honors Seminar). This course is offered annually during the spring semester and normally should be taken during the student's junior year. In order to be admitted to History 92 students must have a 3.5 grade-point average in history courses, of which there must be at least four.
  2. Students studying at another institution abroad or domestically during the second semester of their junior year are excused from taking History 92 but must still meet the grade-point and course requirements to be admitted to the honors program. In addition, they, just as do participants in History 92, must complete a prospectus of their proposed topic under the direction of a History faculty member. They must submit it for approval to that faculty member by the first day of class at the beginning of their senior year. These students are strongly urged to contact their prospective thesis advisors and determine their topics before leaving campus, since it is difficult to establish the relationship from afar.
  3. The precise form and substance of the prospectus must be determined through conversation with the thesis advisor. Generally, they are around 15 pages long and contain an examination of the topic, including a discussion of its various elements, its possible significance, and anticipated challenges to be overcome; an evaluation of the primary and archival sources, including a plan for how to access them, what they might contain (often resulting from telephone or e-mail communication with archivists at distant sites), and in some cases a description of those already read; and an annotated bibliography of secondary works.
  4. Honors students must take at least one History 197 seminar, but are strongly urged to take more than one because of the opportunities they provide to hone writing and research skills. Taking a seminar during the junior year may help a student settle on a thesis topic and advisor.
  5. Students must present to the Honors Director by the last day of classes in the sixth semester a form (available in Green House and at our website) signed by the thesis advisor and by two other members of the History Department who can attest to their preparation. Exceptions to this deadline may be granted, extending it to the end of the first week of classes in the senior year, but no later.
  6. Students enroll in History 93 (thesis research) during the first semester of their senior years and History 94 (thesis writing) during the second semester. Students register for this independent work with their individual thesis advisors, not with the Honors Director. History 92, 93, and 94 do not count toward the eight courses required for concentration in History.
  7. Students must turn in three bound copies of the completed thesis by the date in April set by the department (see below).
  8. All student requests for exceptions to rules regarding the honors program must be submitted to the Honors Director who will consult with the concentration advisors. The decision of the concentration advisors, who are generally quite cautious about granting any exceptions, will be final.

Instructions for the Writing of Honors Theses

1. Due Date

In late April--at a time to be announced--three (3) typed copies are due at the History Department. Since each thesis has to be read by two instructors, discrepancies of judgment ironed out, and then a recommendation made to meet the EPC deadline for Honors--all within two weeks--no extensions of the due date can be made. If a thesis is turned in late but before the end of the term, credit and grade for History 94 may still be granted; only the awarding of Honors is affected. The CCC makes the final award of Honors upon the recommendation of the Department.

2. Length, Binding, and Notes

The length of the thesis depends upon the topic, and, although considerably shorter theses have merited distinction, the average thesis is around 100 pages. The thesis must be suitably bound; a paper clip is not suitable. Notes do not have to be at the bottom of the page, and may be placed at the end.

3. Writing

Writing is the final and most important stage in the preparation of the thesis. Months of historical research can be wasted if the thesis, like any historical work, is not carefully written. Most students allow too little time for writing. Six months of research cannot be put together well in two weeks. Writing should begin no later than the start of the second semester. Research and writing do not have to be compartmentalized. The student may move back and forth between research and writing. Putting off writing until there is too little time left for revision and polishing is the most common and serious mistake students make.

4. Readers

Each thesis will be read by two instructors other than the thesis advisor. If both readers determine that the thesis is of Honors quality, the student will be recommended for Honors. If neither reader deems the thesis to be of Honors quality, the student will not receive Honors. If the two readers are divided in their evaluation, the thesis advisor will make the final judgment. In any case, the thesis advisor will have total responsibility for awarding the grades in History 93-94. The advisor is not responsible for the quality of any theses he or she is directing.

The Honors Director assigns readers for all theses. In rare instances, if students are aware of faculty in other departments who would be particularly well qualified readers of their theses, they may suggest them as readers to the Honors Director. In consultation with the student's thesis advisor, the Director will then decide if it is appropriate to ask the person in question to take on the task. In such cases, the student ought to secure the individual's agreement to be a reader in advance of nominating him or her to the Honors Director. This should be done at least two weeks before the thesis deadline. Only one reader may come from outside the History Department.

Students may also indicate to the Honors Advisor the names of Department members whom they would like to have as readers, but they should be aware that an equitable distribution of theses among Department faculty often requires overriding such suggestions. Students are not normally informed of the identity of their readers, although many identify themselves by signing their reader's reports.

How to Apply for Admission to the Honors Program

Applications are available at the Department of History Office on the Brown Campus, or on-line. The form must be filled-out in full and signed by the candidate as well as the candidate's thesis advisor. Once completed the form should be submitted to the Department's Honors Advisor.

An application to the Honors Program is available here as a pdf file.

Recent Honors Theses

  • Maha R. Atal for “Anglo-French Relations and Radical Politics: The Case of G.W.M. Reynolds 1835-53”

    Yesenia Barrragan for “Woman as Mother, Woman as Other: The Political Philosophy of Luisa Capetillo”

    Scott A. Blumenkranz for “The Alvitre-Brown Affair: Manhood, Murder and Frontier Justice in Early Los Angeles”

    Casey D. Bohlen for “Our Father, Who Art in Congress: The Political Beginnings of Father Robert F. Drinan, S. J.”

    Fokion A. Burgess for “Calculus of the Flesh: Eugenics and the Sexual Pedagogy of American Empire”

    Hannah N. Copperman for "A Flawed Attempt at a National Conversation on Race: President Clinton’s One America Initiative June 1997- September 1998”

    Sara T. Damiano for “From the Shadows of the Bar: Law and Women’s Legal Literacy in Eighteenth-Century Newport”

    David A. Fedman for “Weighing Guilt: The Executive Committee and the Crafting of the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal”

    Ryan A. Gise for “From Charity to Medical Care: The Evolution of the Modern Hospital in Providence, RI”

    Anna K. Hermann for “Teaching Democracy: The Implementation and Outcome of the Re-Education of German Prisoners of War in RI During World War II”

    Rachel G. Hoffman for “Arendt before Politics: Judging”

    Henry S. Hoyle for “Looking Ahead to Harbin’s Prospects, How Can One Not Produce a Great Sigh? Liu Jingyan’s Chinese Harbin”

    Adam M. Kriesberg for “Through King Philip’s Woods: Metacom’s Legacy and Historical Memory in Bristol, RI”

    Madelyn A. Morris for “One Riot Becomes Many: A Media History of the 1968 Democratic National Convention and Rioting in Chicago”

    Kenneth E. Seligson for “Sailing to the Ends of the Earth: The Growth and Decline of Ancient Roman Trade with the Indian Subcontinent During the First Three Centuries CE”

    Elizabeth M. Sher for “Music Lessons: A Cultural Analysis of Leonard Bernstein and the Young People’s Concerts, 1958-1972”

    Aaron M. Stanton for “The Periphery on the Vanguard: The Transatlantic Telegraph Cable and the West of Ireland”

    Elisabeth A. Stelson for “Saving Women from Suffrage: Women Antisuffragists in Illinois, 1897-1913”

    Nicholas A. Swisher for “The Recipe for Madness: Social, Economic and Political Satire by Mad Magazine, 1952-1960”

    Jennifer E. Tarr for “Damnable driftes’? Witchcraft, Community, and Common Law in Elizabethan England”

    Tyler G. Whitmire for “A Convergence of Hope: Radical Pacifists and Their Nonviolent Projects in Africa, 1959-1963”

    Elizabeth K. Wilson for “Staging Civil Rights: Black Theater and White Critics in New York City, 1959-1968”