Using Historical Sources
get their information from two different kinds of sources: primary and secondary. Primary sources are first
hand sources; secondary sources are second-hand sources. For example, suppose there had been a car accident.
The description of the accident which a witness gives to the police is a primary source because it comes
from someone actually there at the time. The story in the newspaper the next day is a secondary source
because the reporter who wrote the story did not actually witness it. The reporter is presenting a way of
understanding the accident or an interpretation.
Using Primary Sources
sources are interesting to read for their own sake: they give us first hand, you-are-there insights into
the past. They are also the most important tools a historian has for developing an understanding of an
event. Primary sources serve as the evidence an historian uses in developing an interpretation and in
building an argument to support that interpretation. You will be using primary sources not only to help
you better understand what went on, but also as evidence as you answer questions and develop arguments
about the past.
I. Reading a primary source.
Sources do not speak for themselves, they have to be interpreted. That is, we can't always immediately
understand what a primary source means, especially if it is from a culture significantly different from
our own. It is therefore necessary to try to understand what it means and to figure out what the source
can tell us about the past.
you interpret primary sources, you should think about these questions as you examine the source:
Place the source in its historical context.
1. Who wrote it? What do
you know about the author?
2. Where and when was it written?
3. Why was it written?
4. To what audience is it addressed?
What do you know about this audience?
Classify the source.
1. What kind of work is it?
2. What was its purpose?
3. What are the important
conventions and traditions governing this kind of source?
what legal, political, religious or philosophical traditions is it a part?
Understand the source.
1. What are the key words in
the source and what do they mean?
2. What point is the author trying
to make? Summarize the thesis.
3. What evidence does the
author give to support the thesis?
4. What assumptions underlay
5. What values does the source
6. What problems does it
address? Can you relate these problems to the historical situation?
7. What action does the
author expect as a result of this work? Who is to take this action?
does the source motivate that action?
Evaluate the source as a source of historical information.
1. How typical is this
source for this period?
2. How widely was this
3. What problems, assumptions,
arguments, ideas and values, if any, does it share with other
from this period?
4. What other evidence can
you find to corroborate your conclusions?
II. Be Your Own Interpreter
very tempting in a course of this kind to use the textbook as a source of interpretations. If you
encounter a primary source which you don't entirely understand it seems easiest to look up the proper
interpretation in the text, rather than trying to figure it out for your self. In this course I would
like to encourage you to develop your interpretation. This process will take some patience, some imagination,
some practice and a lot of hard work on your part. But you will be developing an important, transferable skill
and also the tools and attitudes you need to develop to think on your own.
Using Secondary Sources
is a strong temptation in a history class to believe that the answers to all the questions are found in
the textbook and that the object of the course is to learn the textbook. While it is certainly possible
to approach this course in that manner, you will not learn as much since you will be a passive recipient
of knowledge, rather than an active participant in the learning process, and it will actually mean more
work for you since you will be doing more than you need to. This section is designed to help you use the
textbook more efficiently and effectively.
I. Three ways to use a secondary source.
As a collection of facts.
secondary source if you need to find a particular piece of information quickly. You might need
know, for example, when Genghis Khan lived, in what year the cotton gin was invented, or the
of London in 1648.
As a source of background material.
your interests are focused on one subject, but you need to know something about what else was
on at that time or what happened earlier, you can use a secondary source to find the
material you might need. For example, if you are writing about Luther's 95 Theses,
should use a secondary source to help you understand the Catholic Church in the
As an interpretation.
the facts do not speak for themselves, it is necessary for the historian to give them some
and to put them in an order people can understand. This is called an interpretation. Many
sources provide not only information, but a way of making sense of that information.
should use a secondary source if you wish to understand how an historian makes sense of
particular event, person, or trend.
II. Using interpretations.
of the most important tasks in reading a secondary source is finding and understanding that particular
author's interpretation. How does that particular author put the facts together so that they make sense?
Finding the interpretation.
authors want to communicate their interpretation. Because the reason for writing a book or
is to communicate something to another person, a good author will make the interpretation
1. In an Essay.
an essay, particularly a short one, an author will often state the interpretation as part of the
statement. The thesis statement is the summary of what the author is going say in the
The thesis statement is usually found at the end of the introductory section or in the
2. In a Book.
a longer work, such as a book, the author will very likely have many thesis statements, one
more for each section or chapter of the book. The thesis for the book as a whole will often
found either in the introduction or in the conclusion. The thesis for individual chapters is
found in the first or last paragraph. Topic sentences of paragraphs will also often have
clues as to the author's interpretation.
It is often helpful, particularly if you are interested in the author's interpretation to
Read only the first and last chapters in their entirety; for all of the other chapters, read
the first and last paragraphs. If this is a well written book, this should give you a fairly
idea of the author's point of view.
The importance of the interpretation.
interpretation is how a historian makes sense of some part of the past. Like a good story, well
history reveals not only the past, but something about the present as well. Great historians
us to see aspects of the past and the human condition which we would not be able to find on
Historians often disagree on interpretations.
facts are ambiguous. Historians ask different questions about the past. Historians have
values and come to the material with different beliefs about the world. For these and other
historians often arrive at different interpretations of the same event. For example, many
see the French Revolution as the result of beliefs in liberty and equality; other historians
the French Revolution as the result of the economic demands of a rising middle class. It is,
important to be able to critically evaluate a historian's interpretation.
III. Evaluating an interpretation.
1. What historical problem
is the author addressing?
2. What is the thesis?
3. How is the thesis arrived at?
type of history book is it?
historical methods or techniques does the author use?
evidence is presented?
you identify a school of interpretation?
4. What sources are used?
1. Did the author present a
the evidence support the thesis?
the evidence in fact prove what the author claims it proves?
the author made any errors of fact?
2. Does the author use questionable
methods or techniques?
3. What questions remain unanswered?
4. Does the author have a
a. If so,
does it interfere with the argument?
b. If not,
might there be a hidden agenda?
1. How does this book compare
to others written on this or similar topics?
2. How do the theses differ?
3. Why do the theses differ?
they use the same or different sources?
they use these sources in the same way?
they use the same methods or techniques?
they begin from the same or similar points of view?
these works directed at the same or similar audience?
4. When were the works written?
5. Do the authors have different
6. Do they differ in their political,
philosophical, ethical, cultural, or religious assumptions?