From the beginning paragraph this paper, a document analysis of Peter the Great and Catherine II, clearly warranted an A. The information within each paragraph developed a clear path that aimed towards the goal of proving the thesis statement. The thesis itself expressed a clear and focused argument as well as a well organized perspective, which according to the “writing rubric” is required in order to receive an A. Furthermore only when necessary did the author include quotations in order to further prove his argument. Besides it being absolutely necessary, the majority of the paper was composed of paraphrasing of the historical documents, rather than quoting, in order to further their argument.

Each of the topic sentences within the paper expressed a controvertible statement in which always related back to the thesis statement, thus providing another requirement in receiving an A. Each sentence following the topic sentences also followed the “writing rubric” by staying within the focus of the topic sentence along with working towards proving the thesis statement.

Specifically speaking, the authors paragraph about Catherine’s reforms, which were the “Statute on Provincial Administration”, the “Charter to the Nobility”, and the “Charter to the Towns”, expresses the necessary requirements for an A. The author states and explains each of Catherine’s reforms as well as discusses Catherine’s reasons for creating each document, such as providing a response to the rise of the serf and peasant rebellion known as Pugachev’s Rebellion; thus providing the answers to the “five W questions” like “what?” “how?” and “why?”, which are crucial to any history paper.

When looking at the mechanics of the document analysis it, like the other aspects of the paper, expresses the requirements in order to receive an A. The author uses the correct Chicago formatting style by including footnotes on each page. The author writes with an active voice instead of a passive voice as well, which is also particularly important when writing a paper about history. The only mechanical error found within this otherwise mechanically flawless paper consists of a few grammatical errors.

Ultimately this paper provides every aspect needed for an A. It  initially presents a logical and well organized argument that directly answers the prompt. Furthermore each following paragraph continues in a detailed, logical way with the author writing in chronological order of Peter and Catherine’s reforms all the while remaining in the focus of proving the thesis statement.