Analysis of Primary Sources
Historians
analyze historical sources in different ways. First, historians think about
where, when and why a document was created. They consider whether a source was
created close in location and time to an actual historical event. Historians
also think about the purpose of a source. Was it a personal diary intended to
be kept private? Was the document prepared for the public?
Some
primary sources may be judged more reliable than others, but every source is
biased in some way. As a result, historians read sources skeptically and
critically. They also cross-check sources against other
evidence and sources. Historians follow a few basic rules to help them
analyze primary sources. Read these rules below. Then read the questions for
analyzing primary sources. Use these rules and questions as you analyze primary
source documents yourself.
To
judge the quality of a primary source, historians use the time and place
rule. This rule says the closer in time and place a source and its creator
were to an event in the past, the better the source will be. Based on the time
and place rule, better primary sources (starting with the most reliable) might
include:
The
historians' second rule is the bias rule. It says that every source is
biased in some way. Documents tell us only what the creator of the document
thought happened, or perhaps only what the creator wants us to think happened.
As a result, historians follow these bias rule guidelines when they review
evidence from the past:
Questions for Analyzing Primary Sources
The
following questions may help you judge the quality of primary sources: