Like anything you read, humanities articles have a beginning, middle, and end. Each part serves a particular purpose. Knowing the structure and components of an article help you read and understand more effectively.
The introduction of a scholarly article usually reviews some of the literature on the issue (what others have written about it) and provides insight into a problem. It typically explains why a problem is worth considering and why previous attempts to solve it were inadequate or not even attempted. It may briefly introduce methods used to investigate the problem. It often ends by stating the main argument that will be advanced in the article (the thesis) or the author’s primary findings.
Depending on the article this is generally the first 2-5 pages, though it can vary.
As you read, distinguish between the research question (and related thesis--more on this below) and the subject or topic. Don’t just look for a question mark—the research question is rarely written as an actual question. Rather, it will elaborate on what the author set out to explore, why the problem is worth considering, and the scope of the problem or question that the author has chosen to research and explore.
The research question can usually be answered in various ways. The author’s thesis is their answer to the research question.
In the sciences, the methodology is where the experiments are detailed. So what does the methodology look like in the humanities? It still explains the methods the author used to obtain and digest their evidence. It could be the theoretical framework the author applied to the sources. Or, it could be the sources themselves that are used as evidence. The methodology can be tricky to identify, as it often relies on insider knowledge. Reference to particular scholars sometimes points at a way of questioning or considering evidence.
Indicator terms: theory, discourse, approach, method,
Basically, historiography is the history of history. In an article, the historiography is where the author points to what the conversation about the topic has been in the past. Who else has written about this topic? Why is there more to say? How has the conversation evolved? It is often entwined with methodology in the humanities. It’s a fancy way of talking about the larger conversation that has been had throughout time about the topic at hand.
Scholarly articles are argument driven. A well written article will make that argument clear in a thesis of one or more sentences. Generally the thesis is built towards over the course of the introduction, so it will come towards the end of the section. A strong thesis will have some nuance, rather than being a blanket claim. The thesis will guide the rest of the article. As you read, you should keep the thesis in mind to consider how well the author supports that thesis with their evidence.
Well written articles will also include a roadmap for you so you know what’s ahead. Some authors will be explicit in mapping out their argument with cues like “first…second…last” while others are more subtle. What you should look for are the components of the argument laid out in the thesis that will be used to prove their argument. Sometimes this map will be evident with signposting features like section headings.
The bulk of a scholarly article will offer the evidence to support the author’s thesis. Sometimes this will be divided into sections using sub-headings, other times the whole article will be solid text. To critically read this section of the article, it is helpful to keep some general questions in mind.
The type of evidence authors use, and they way they use that evidence is the methodology. If you had a hard time identifying the methodology earlier, you may be able to figure it out as you look at the evidence
Evidence can be drawn from primary or secondary sources.
It is also helpful to note your responses to these questions paragraph by paragraph either in the margins of an article or however you prefer to take notes.
How does this evidence relate to the argument?
Does it support the argument?
Is this being offered as counter-evidence?
What is the actual evidence?
If this is unclear from the the text, look into the notes for the paragraph. What is the author citing as his/her sources for this information?
What is your response?
Does this make sense? Do you agree? Do you have more questions? Is there something you don’t understand? Does this relate to something else you have discussed in class or read?
Are there missing details or gaps?
As you read there will be more questions that you can ask of the visual materials. Do they support the argument, or are the just added in without context? Do you agree with the author’s reading of the visuals? Is there some other sort of visual that would have helped you understand the argument better?
The conclusion to an article should pull the argument together and reiterate the main points and arguments. This is a good place to see if you have understood from your own reading the same message the author is trying to convey. Often the author will also explain the larger significance of their argument here, connecting it to other questions or themes.