"

!"#$%&' )*%+#*, -./*0"-1 2& %&3*.$/03%.& 4.* -3/$"&3-

A step-by-step guide for students examining primary sources, with specific questions divided into five
layers of questioning.
By Kathryn Walbert (http://www.learnnc.org)
So how do I approach primary sources?
In order to fully understand a primary source, youll want to identify it, contextualize it, explore it,
analyze it, and evaluate it. The questions below will help you do all of those things, and understand
why its so important to do them.
1. Identify the Source
What is the nature of the source?
Youll want to know what kind of source it is a newspaper, an oral history account, a diary entry, a
government document, etc. because different kinds of sources must be considered differently. For
example, you might think about a description of a Civil War camp differently than you would think
about a photograph of one, or you might have different questions about census data regarding poverty
in the 1930s than you would about oral history interviews with people who were poor during the
Depression. Knowing that type of source youre dealing with can help you start to think about
appropriate questions.
Who created this source, and what do I know about him/her/them?
Knowing something about who created the source youre using can help you determine what biases
they might have had, what their relationship to the things they described in the source might have been,
and whether or not this source should be considered credible. Keep in mind that someone doesnt have
to be famous or need to have played a dramatic role in history to be a credible source in terms of
understanding the experience of World War I, for example, the writings of a regular soldier in the
trenches may be as valuable or even much more so than the recollections of President Wilson or a
general.
Knowing who wrote the source can also help you figure out the angle or perspective that the source
will convey. For example, the description of a Revolutionary War battle might be very different if it
was written by a soldier in the Continential Army, by George Washington himself, by a British soldier,
or by an American loyalist. You might wonder different things about the account depending on who
wrote it, so knowing the author would definitely help you start to ask the right questions.
When was the source produced?
Knowing when the source was produced can help you start to put it into historical perspective. A
discussion of womens rights in America, for example, would obviously be very different in the 1820s
(one hundred years before women could vote), the 1920s (when women first got the vote), the 1970s
(when the feminist movement was thriving and the Equal Rights Amendment was debated), and 2004.
If you dont know when a source was written, you cant start to put it into its historical context and
understand how it connects to historical events.
If youre using a first-hand account that was written some time after the events that it describes, you
might also take the passage of time into account in your later analysis. For example, you might view
the diary of a settler moving west in the 1870s that was written during her travels in a different way
than you would view the memoirs of that same settler written fifty years later for her grandchildren.
#
Where was the source produced?
Just as it is important to situate the source in time, its also important to identify the place where the
source was produced. If you found an editorial in a newspaper discussing the Montgomery Bus
Boycott, for example, you would want to know where the newspaper was published a newspaper
from Montgomery might be considered very differently from one published in Boston, Massachussetts,
Mobile, Alabama, or Washington, D.C.
2. Contextualize the Source
What do you know about the historical context for this source?
Once you know when, where, and by whom the source was created, you can start to place it in its
historical context . What was going on in the place and time that this source was created? What
significant local, regional, or national events might this source relate to? You can look for information
about the historical context for your sources in many places. Sometimes sources are packaged along
with descriptive information that can help you contextualize them this is often true of web-based
collections of resources in which the website compiler might provide you with a written introduction to
the sources to help you place them in context. Similarly, libraries and archives often provide collection
descriptions or finding aids for their materials that can provide context. You can also consult secondary
sources to learn more about the time and palce in which the source was created.
What do I know about how the creator of this source fits into that historical
context?
Once you know the historical context of the source, youll want to think further about the person(s)
who created the source. How were they connected to that historical context? If its a source about the
Civil Rights Movement, for example, you may have already figured out the persons location, their
race, their sex, and some other basic information but what do you know about his connection to the
Movement? Was he an activist? Was he opposed? Was he involved in the race riot that he describes in
the source and, if so, what was his role? Figuring out how this person fit into their historical context,
individually, can help you think more critically and creatively about what he or she had to say.
Why did the person who created the source do so?
Youll also want to know the motivations of the person who wrote the source, which may be easier to
guess after you know their historical context. Do you think this source was created as a private
document, or was it intended for others to view? How do you know that? If there was an intended
audience, who was that audience? Family? The general public? "Future generations?" What did the
creator of the source intend for that audience to get out of it? Was she trying to persuade people to a
particular point of view? Was she simply recording daily events? Was she intentionally trying to
deceive the audience? Was she trying to make herself look good?
3. Explore the source
What factual information is conveyed in this source?
Some sources can provide us with valuable factual information about what happened in the past. As
you read, think about what information in the source is presented as fact. But, of course, things that are
presented as fact are not always accurate, so you will also want to think about whether the facts
presented in the source can be verified. Where else might you look to check and make sure that those
facts are accurate? How will you decide whether you believe this persons accounting of the facts to be
accurate?
What opinions are related in this source?
Since primary sources are first-hand accounts that often convey only a single persons point of view,
they will likely contain a fair bit of opinion. Identify sections of the source that seem to be opinion and
$
ask yourself why the creator of the source might hold that opinion. Who else might share that opinion?
Is it an opinion that you find compelling? Why or why not?
What is implied or conveyed unintentionally in the source?
People dont always spell out what they are thinking when they write a letter, a diary entry, or a
newspaper column. Intentionally or unintentionally, there may be ambiguities or vagueness in the
source places that require the reader to "fill in the blanks" and use the authors tone, rhetorical
strategies, and attitude to make inferences about meanings that are not spelled out. For example, in a
letter to the editor in a newspaper criticizing a particular politician, the author may never spell out his
or her beliefs about the role of government or how the government should handle particular kinds of
issues, but based on their criticisms, you can probably infer or make an educated guess about those
questions.
What is not said in this source?
Sometimes what isnt said in a source can be as interesting as what is said. Ask yourself, what did I
expect to have seen here that I didnt see? For example, it would seem odd to find a letter written the
day after the attack on Pearl Harbor that didnt mention that event you might wonder, "Why didnt
this person write about the Pearl Harbor attack? Did she not know about it? Was it not important to her
or to her audience? Was it so much on everyones mind that she didnt feel a need to write about it?"
You may have no good answers to these questions, but thinking about what seems missing can help
you imagine the writers frame of mind and motivations a bit more clearly.
What is surprising or interesting about the source?
Once you know what is and isnt in the source, take a minute to think about what was interesting or
surprising. What did you learn that you didnt know before? What details were interesting to you? Was
the perspective revealed by this source one that you hadnt thought about before? What did you not
expect that you found here and what did you expect that wasnt here after all?
What do I not understand in this source?
Are there words that were unclear to you? Are there events or people referred to that you arent
familiar with? Does anything not make sense? Think about where you might go to clarify these issues
so that you can understand the source fully. You might look up unfamiliar vocabulary in the dictionary
or do an online search to find some basic historical information about an event that the source writer
described. Doing these simple things can help you make sure that you get the most out of each source.
4. Analyze the source
How does the creator of the source convey information and make his/her point?
Sometimes its important to not only think about what the author said, but how he said it. What
strategies did the writer/artist/etc. use to convey information? In the case of written or oral sources, did
he use humor? Sarcasm? An appeal to patriotism? Guilt? An appeal to religious principles? Logical
arguments? Tugging on heartstrings?
How is the world described in the source different from my world?
Think about the time and place in which this source was created. What did the author and people
around her believe? What was their world like? What significant differences are there between that
world and your world today? How would you feel if you were in the authors shoes? What would be
reasonable to expect of the author, given his or her historical context?
How might others at the time have reacted to this source?
%
Would the ideas and perspective revealed by this source have been universally accepted by others?
Would certain individuals or groups have disagreed with the account in this source? Why or why not?
Imagine an individual who might have disagreed with something in this source how would that
persons account be different? What might they convey in their own source, and how? (For example, if
youre reading the diary of a plantation owner, how might a source giving the perspective of an
overseer, an abolitionist, the owner of a bigger or smaller plantation, or a slave be different?)
5. Evaluate the source
How does this source compare to other primary sources?
Have you read other sources like this one? What did they say? Does the account in this source seem to
mesh will with those, or does it depart dramatically? Remember that if your source doesnt say exactly
what other sources say, it may still be entirely truthful. It could be that the other sources were wrong. It
could also be that all of the authors of your sources told the truth as they saw it, but that their own
individual perspectives gave them different views and therefore different accounts. It may also be that
the author of your source had a unique experience that wasnt like most peoples experiences, but it
happened that way just the same. For example, some people remained very wealthy during the Great
Depression they were not in the majority, to be sure, but their stories are still true and can offer
valuable insights into the diversity of experiences during that era in American history. Consider all of
the possible reasons why this source may differ from other primary sources before you decide to reject
any of your sources as "untrue" or "useless."
How does this source compare to secondary source accounts?
Youll also want to think about how your source compares to secondary sources that you have read
such as your textbook and accounts written by historians. Does this source seem to fit with the
interpretations presented in those secondary works? In what ways does it fit and in what ways does it
differ? Keep in mind that just because it differs from what your book says, that doesnt mean that the
source isnt accurate. It may be that this source offers an insight that the secondary text authors didnt
know about. It may also be that this source presents information that the secondary source authors
werent interested in or chose not to include for a variety of possible reasons. Consider all of the
possible reasons why this source may differ from the secondary source account before you decide to
reject one or the other completely.
What do you believe and disbelieve from this source?
Based on everything you know about the historical context and from reading other accounts, what
elements of this source do you take as credible and believable? What does the weight of the evidence
suggest to you about the believability and historical usefulness of the information and attitudes
conveyed in this source? Does anything in this source seem unbelievable, exaggerated, deceptive, or
simply mistaken? Think about why you are willing to believe certain parts of the source but not others
what are your reasons for accepting some evidence and rejecting other evidence? If you found some
parts of the source to be less than credible, do you think that this assessment in any way taints other
parts of the source?
What do you still not know and where can you find that information?
After assessing your source thoroughly, youll want to take stock of what you do and dont know after
reading it. What are you still wondering about? What gaps did this source leave in your understanding
of the topic at hand, and what new questions did it raise for you? Think, too, about where you might
turn to find out what you still dont know. What kinds of primary sources would help you fill in the
blanks, and what kinds of secondary sources might you consult to answer some of your broader
questions?