Verbal
citation of period source with brief explanation of presentation choices:
what you are and are not recreating (and why not - time, etc.)Educated judges give better scores.
No
explanation of choices. Descriptions of period practice with no mention
of sources -- "Everybody knows that..." or obviously unperiod
work.Copies
from book(s) with citations, applicable parts highlighted. Enough sets for
all judges. Name, dated, stapled.Copies
of pages from unknown book(s), nothing highlighted. Not enough copies. No
name -- gets lost.Copies
from book(s), applicable parts highlighted, notes in margin saying how highlighted
parts support presenter's choices (complete sentences not necessary).Obscure
highlighted parts which may even contradict presentation choices (I've
seen this, no kidding). Sources which support piece, but don't prove it
period.
Very
short paper (1 page or less) quoting from book(s) including bibliographic
citation(s), copies used only for images, clearly labels as to what aspect
of piece they demonstrate.Short
paper which makes claims but which doesn't quote or cite sources for support.
Snowstorm of copies of text passages which could have been summarized.Paper
of any length (1 or few copes) quoting as above, with big section headings,
along with enough copies of cover sheets for all judges, outlining paper
in brief, with noties directing reader to supporting sections of paper.Long
paper with no road signs, which judges can't possibly read in the short
time available, or which they don't even get to see because there aren't
enough copies. Points obscured by mass.Paper
as above, which includes sections on 1) historical background, 2) period
examples, and 3) presenters choices about presenting -- your process, how
you interact with history.Long
paper with lots of historical information, and no indication of how that
information contributed to, or influenced your choices in preparing the
piece. Paper
as above, with copies of period work including notes on how each justifies
various aspects of piece, as well as an honest listing of departures
from period techniques and why (cost, modern equivalents, etc.)Examples
of period work with no indication as to what aspect of the piece they support.
Major aspects left out (i.e., colour choice but not fabric). Hoping that
departures from period won't be noticed.Highest Level Necessary for Competitions:
Paper
as above with primary reliance on original source material. (Sources written
or painted, etc. during the period you are studying.)Throwing
shallow primary source references in to get a longer bibliography. (Like
a list of cook books without discussing recipies inside).Paper
as above, suitable for publication in Tournaments Illuminated or the Compleat
Anachronist, or which makes an original scholarly contribution to the field.Writing
a great article that is so technical and obscure or lengthy that no one
will want to read it. Making readers feel criticized.